Correction: In (3) above, "portfolio FOR grad school" (not of)

I'll try to give a crack at it:

3d models: There are a lot of crappy 3d models in people portfolio. I think generally any 3d models that are undeveloped, uninteresting, or unapealing are considered crappy. 3d models and renderings should serve a couple purposes if done correctly: In study fom, they should be a graphic representation of the idea you're trying to represent. Check out the new morphosis website. They are pretty good at this. When you put in a 3d model to represent a completed object, it should be developed to give a sense of the moment you're trying to convey. Eitherway, they should be used for you to learn something and to inform someone looking at it.

In short, here are some things to avoid: crappy 3d models from a tutorial of 3dmax, unrendered/unarticulated 3ds, sketchup, or rhino models, models of a existing building (i.e. mcmansions, your garage addition, your parents' mcmansion addition, the big box retail complex you did once for an internship, the parthenon, etc. (Not saying you did anything like this -- you know what I mean) You want to show something that's more you and what you want to contribute and learn in architecture. If you can't blow them away with 3d models, then try some other kind of medium.

This portfolio for specifically for the M-Arch 1 you are doing is only demonstrating your design and creative ability and not your architectural practice ability. For example if you did a drafting workshop before, or taken a AutoCAD course, don't put any work like that in your folio unless you want to make it on the early rejection list. Remember, the M-Arch 1 (or M-Arch 3) is geared for people who have had no previous experience or trainign in the profession. The day you enter the studio, your professors will asume you know absolutely nothing about architecture.

Hope this helps

Wait, what's this business about M-Arch 1's and 3's? Is there some sort of jargon classifying differen't M-Arch programs or applicants?

Like, M-Arch 1's have no undergraduate Arch/Design degree, and M-Arch 2's do?

Some schools call the 3-year program the "m-arch I" and some call it the "m-arch II"

Correction: Some call it the M-Arch III. (I said M-arch II)

med., thanks for the insight. I was a little iffy on whether I should include architecture work in my portfolio or not after seeing that some other MArch I applicants had. I wouldn't just include tutorial work, of course; I would include actual original plans and models. However, chances are, if I try learning/doing this stuff myself without taking an architecture design course or something, I will end up making obvious mistakes which would probably indeed land me in an early rejection pile. I guess I'll settle for drawings/paintings of buildings now.

The weird thing about MArch I is, since they don't expect any architecture work in your portfolio, it seems especially hard to demonstrate any interest in architecture beyond the superficial, especially if the work is totally unrelated (I've seen a lot of MArch I portfolio work of sketches of humans, hands, etc. What does this have to do with your interest in architecture?). Even if you're recreating buildings via drawings/paintings, you're just recreating them. What does this say? You like copying stuff. The best you could do to show any interest (without going into architectural plans) is to show drawings/paintings/whathaveyou of original building ideas.

I have similar questions to Rexxer's...

I've been absorbed in an Arch program in the Middle East, and based on what I've been doing have decided to go back to do an M.Arch I. I know for certain that my puny little buildings- which have been the most well-received in my class- would not hold a candle to what I could produce if I were admitted into a good M.Arch program.

Wouldn't a combo of original creative work and the arch stuff I've been doing suffice for a portfolio? By not applying for advanced placement, don't I already give the impression that I want to be retrained? Won't seeing the work give reviewers a smidgeon of my potential given my mediocre background? Or would they think 'is this the best she can do?'

Because honestly, I have some fine-art stuff from high school (looong ago, but quite good), but the most CREATIVE work I have is my architecture studios, in which I've chronicled the entire design process. To include or not to include?

god, rexxer, ur such a n00b that it sickens me

i feel like raping a harlequin up the umbilical cord now ;(

"Remember, the M-Arch 1 (or M-Arch 3) is geared for people who have had no previous experience or trainign in the profession."

I'm pretty sure this statement is just plain wrong. If not, I'm in trouble applying to m.arch programs with a bs arch and working experience, yet somehow I feel fine.

Relating to TheVillan's comment, does anyone think that those with previous significant architecture experience (e.g. in the form of a BS, or work experience) may have an edge in admissions process due to their [on average [most likely]] greater wisdom? Or could they even be negatively affected in the admissions process, either because (i) their architecture material might be [possibly sub-consciously] compared [and possibly deemed inferior] to other architecture material that the admissions officers have seen, including those of MArch II applicants, OR (ii) the program really is designed for beginners, and non-beginners would take up spots and resources that could have instead be used for beginners.

I have seen a portfolio accepted to top MArch I programs that included architectural work, including simplified floor plans (simplified in that it did not include construction material and other little facts). Her non-architecture work, consisting of paintings and drawings, was unoriginal and had noticeable faults in lighting and perspective. If anyone is interested, I believe you can find it at dept/archdesign/cgi-bin/blog/2007/01/12/marcela-delgado/ under www.stanford.edu I can't help wondering if her previous architecture experience compensated for what was otherwise a mediocre portfolio.

I guess my main question here is the following: is this program really for "beginners" per se, or would they prefer to see at least some architectural knowledge?

usually, the MARCH I is for students who do not have an architecture background-meaning their undergrad degree is in something other than architecture. Some of these people will have had exposure to architecture-maybe an architectural history degree or architectural studies, but that is not a B.S. in Architecture/ environmental design. Some students may have an art background, but many do not.
Those students with a B.S. in architecture apply for the MARCH II programs. They are not considered with your applications (usually-check with the program, but most schools do not compare these two sets of applicants)

For the MARCH I applicants portfolio they are mainly looking to see that you have some grasp of the three-dimensional environment-that does not mean 3D computer modeling. They are looking for your creative interpretations of what you see-whether through hand drawings, painting, sculpture, photography, and other art forms, even writing samples. I know people whose portfolios have only been writing samples. They want to see your understanding not of the built environment, but of your surroundings and how you interpret these things. They are not looking for you to redraw a floor plan or building. They do not expect you to have understanding of architecture or architectural theory-they will teach this to you when you arrive. They want you to have a critical eye of your surroundings and to be able to make conclusions of those interactions.

So for an entrance portfolio I would concentrate on what strengths you already have-do you draw or paint well? Sculpt? What creative outlets do you usually engage in? Dance? music? play those things up in your portfolio. Don't try to learn architecture for the sake of the portfolio-it is not expected and will not be executed well.

hope this helps. Good luck!

I am in a similar position to some of these commenters; I had one "architecture" class in undergrad as part of an art minor (no computers for this one). I have a couple projects that were well-reviewed and I like, but unfortunately they are not well-documented enough to fill a portfolio by themselves. My other two-dimensional artwork was not particularly passionate or inspired; I have always preferred three-dimensional works or making plans for three-dimensional pieces.

My skill/passion has always been for some of the more "craft-y" arts; pottery, handspinning, weaving, sewing, etc. I am nervous to put material of this kind into my application portfolio, I guess because that kind of artwork was looked down on by the "High Art" mentality of my school. Are the people reviewing MArch 1 applications favorable to handcrafts as opposed to Art?

My second problem is that I have so many various passions- in addition to the above, I am a lifelong dancer and have done some choreography, I make wedding cakes, and am working on a project with some relatively advanced (for an amateur) interior design work for a friend. I am afraid if I include all or even most of the things I am passionate about, my portfolio will seem unfocused and scattered. Do you have any advice for picking some continuity out of many unrelated projects?

Oh yes and jewelry design. I can't even remember it all! Sigh.

laurens-

Don't include lots of pottery in your portfolio, there is a bias against this craft partially based on the shear volume of folks that enroll in these courses to fulfill their undergrad arts requirements.

Weaving will take you places, especially if there are frayed edges and modern/experimental motifs (just don't include a reproduction of the Bayeux Tapestries). There is a resurgence of weaving as a process in architecture.

Spinning yarn has potential too...

As for sewing, are you a budding fashion designer, or just making embroidered doilies? Do you use non-traditional materials or calico? The more architectonic, the better. See Diller+Scofidios work or Issey Miyaki's pleats for an example of architectonic sewing/fashion.

Retro-colonial crafts have traction at places like Notre Dame, but not sci-arc. A few years back there was a student at penn that 'carved gothic wood pews'. So there is space for one eccentric/anachronistic individual at each school. (ie, can you discuss the parametric algorithms that go into making chain mail?)

as for dancing/choreaography - do you know laban or other movement notational systems? My MLA class had 2 professional dancers and one amateur dancers. Any great photos of you performing? it's worth include them (and make sure to cite the photographer if it's not you).


find common themes - eg, movement, age, birth, love between your creative endeavors and use those themes to organize the folio.

relax, you have ten months to edit your portfolio into a cohesive representation of your potential for becoming an architect.

Thanks treekiller, that is very helpful. If it makes any difference, my favorite school right now is UVA, as I am interested in their dual degree options with MArch and MLA.

I had heard of the pottery bias before... pity, because it was the most developed of my school arts (5+ years).

The process of taking a fiber from animal-hair to artwork fascinates me. Since I work in every step of the process, there is some opportunity to work through that aspect somewhat- I may sit down with my cards and wheel and see what comes out with that as my inspiration.

My sewing mostly takes the form of historic reproductions (I do a fair bit of reenacting and did history undergrad). These are historically authentic to the best of my ability which does limit the fabrics a bit. I expect it would not be very good at showcasing my design skills- anybody can match fabrics and follow a pattern- but the craftsmanship that goes into handsewing these garments is pretty involved, and there are some interesting bits regarding seams, kind of like joints in a building. I am not sure if that has a place in portfolio, though!

I don't use Laban specifically but I do have a notational system that I use when I choreograph- almost plans and elevations, with lots of little figures superimposed on one another, and arrows.

Sometimes ten months seems like no time at all. Thanks for the encouragement.

"I'm pretty sure this statement is just plain wrong. If not, I'm in trouble applying to m.arch programs with a bs arch and working experience, yet somehow I feel fine."

the villain -- I'm afraid I am not wrong -- remember I'm speaking of actual experience here while you are only speaking of your non-experience. I came from a non-architecture background and didn't take one single architecture class in undergrad and didn't work one day in the profession prior. Most of my collueages were in similar situations. some had interior design background, some had art backgrounds, other had completely unrelated backgrounds in poly sci, psychology, and even accounting.

The idea for this m.arch path is exactly that -- having no prior background in architecture.

What's commonly known as the M.Arch II is for people WITH backgrounds -- usually a 4-year non-professional degree.

how is my experience "non-experience"?

I understand a large number of m.arch 1 students have no arch background...but I have trouble believing the programs are "geared" towards only those students. I mean, how could that be when a majority of the undergraduate arch programs nowadays are the "4+2" bs/ba arch + m.arch? If your theory were correct people like me (and MOST people who have undergrad arch degrees) would have no graduate programs to go to! remember, we're cant enroll in march 2 until you have a professional degree.

laurens - show/document the process of inspiration/creativity in your portfolio, not just the finished pieces - ie, photos of the harvesting the raw fiber, the processing the fiber, spinning, then weaving, with sketches of the final weaving will go a long way to getting a winning portfolio.

your notational system sounds cool - can you share it [url=http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=70197_0_42_0_C]here[url]?

opps:

HERE

The Villan and Med.
- I thought there were 3 possible M.Archs...

M.Arch I = No background whatsoever, only a BA in an unrelated field
M.Arch 2 = B.S. or B.A. in Architecture, non-professional
M.Arch 3 = You already have a 5-year B.Arch

What is confusing is that many schools label these things differently!

Then you have my situation, which will be 2 years of Architectural Technology on top of my 4 year BA, which means I am somewhere between "no background" and "BA in Arch." :sigh:

Here is Harvard's site, it also states an M.Arch I, M.Arch I with Advanced Standing ("individuals who have completed a preprofessional four-year bachelor of arts or bachelor of science degree with a major in architecture or environmental design may be eligible for admission with advanced standing,") and their M.Arch II.

http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/academic/arch/degrees.html

your m.arch 3 = ACTUAL m.arch 2

your m.arch 1+2= ACTUAL m.arch 1...only difference being that sometimes they let people with bs/ba archs skip a year of the m.arch 1

thus, my issue with labeling m.arch 1 a degree for only non-arch backgrounds.

My M.Arch program was called an M-Arch III which was geared for people who no undergraduate architectural background. Many schools do it differently.

Upon entering this program the assumption from the faculty is that you've never drafted anything, modeled anything, or sketched anything in your entire life. Many of the students came from completely unrelated fields (biology, poly sci, philosophy, liberal arts, etc). Others who (in my opinion) had a slight advantage came from interior design backgrounds or something similar. But the faculty (at least where I went) took all of that into consideration as every student developed and matured differently.

from the University of Texas, this year (regarding their M. Arch 1 program):

"Altogether there were 516 (both those with and without architecture backgrounds). There were 229 applicants without backgrounds. We are looking for an entering class of about 48."

Taken from:
http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=86994_0_42_50_C

I agree with TheVillan with regards to the background of people in most M. Arch 1 programs. It is a mixed bag of undergrad degrees, but almost half of the applicants are people with pre-professional architecture degrees on the 4+2 track (myself included). I saw samples of admitted students at several schools I visited and there were many students with extensive school and work samples.

However, some schools (SCI-Arc for one) have separate programs for what is essentially the same M. Arch degree. They have the 3 year M. Arch 1 for non-arch. backgrounds and 2 year M. Arch 2 for people with pre-professional degrees.