What? I hardly think Chirac would make this up.

Completely absurd.

....?

The folio has a good graphic language and sensibility but many of the images have no sense of scale which keeps the projects at arms length fromt he viewers.

Consider larger "money shots" of the project with scale figures within -- give it a stronger sense of presence. It's a deep portfolio and it just needs to be a little more versatile. Change up some of the colors -- every page looks exactly the same. The white background is great -- keep that. Fonts are reasonable, but the image need greater variation in size.

and I hope you don't plan on sending this to employers, I can hardly read anything in it.

You're hired.
Nuff said.

thanks med, i appreciate your comments. when you say that you can hardly read anything, are you talking about the size of text and quality of images? if i am sending out portfolis to employers, i definitely plan on scaling up the sizes of things, but right now all i have is the .pdfs from when i was printing them out to send off to schools. with the hard copies there aren't any problems concerning legibility.

or is the problem with the content of my text? as in, the way i'm describing the projects is convoluted and confusing? i'm always worried that i'm sounding cliche and naive.

i agree with you on the sizes of my images. thanks for appreciating the overall graphic quality, and i think wanting to remain true to that made me adhere too rigidly to my format.

What grad schools did you apply for?

Doh, sorry treebeard. I posted in the wrong thread.

But yea, looks good. Concise enough for professional use, to be sure.

I would second the need the mix up it a bit. All the pages are very similar in distribution and weight of content. A spread or 2 throughout with just a really great large image with help add some diversity.

I'm not really excited about the RANDOM capitalized WORDS in the body descriptions. It would be one thing if there was one key statement in the text that was bold but the words just add an odd syncopation to both the reading and the visual display of the text.

thanks for the feedback, guys. jk3hl, at first i thought you were poking fun at my random capitalization in the text when you bolded in absurd... but then i thought nah, i'm reading into it too much. haha.

zga-
i applied to tulane, washington university of st.louis, university of minnesota, and catholic university. catholic is where i got my undergrad.

and yeah, i now think the random capitalization is silly. it's a bit played out, and i don't think i've ever seen it used in a way that's effective like the author intended. i did it because i saw how my friend did it, and i liked how it looked in his portfolio. plus i thought some of the bodies of text were a bit long and i was hoping that it would add more graphic variety to a boring grey block of text. i can't wait to change that in the next iteration.

I think it looks pretty good. But it's amazing how much portfolios can look alike too. I couldn't get the images big enough to read the text, but I have heard the comment before that people don't even read it. But if they do decide to, I think it's important for it to be as concise and clear as possible. Sometimes the description of a project can meander, but most people don't want to know all the details. I also agree with the comment about the money shot. I even like to do big blow up detail shots that signify a new project and next section. I've gotten good response from that. I think it shows that you have presentation skill too, which is important. Good luck!

May I quasi-hijack this thread? My question is about portfolio's in general - I'm not trying to be negative towards her portfolio - if I may, hers is in my experience the typical architectural portfolio, showing great design process and schematic thought. However, I still do not understand how a potential employer views such a portfolio. I would love to hear what the "higher-ups" have to say to this.

Here is my understanding of architecture: the typical progression when one joins a firm fresh out of school is that they do CAD, redlines and revisions, with not-so-much input into the overall and schematic design.

Rather, it is the project architect or principal who performs the major schematic design. And my experience is that they cling to this responsibility mightily, having themselves paid their dues and done the prerequisite drafting and redlines.

Therefore, my point is this: I'm not seeing the sense of showing a potential employer what your newly found design senses are, and how they could potentially clash with the employers own hard-earned sensibilities. Rather, I would think that the employer is thinking that at the end of the day, architecture is still a business, and the employer is looking to see how you can contribute effectively to that business. Would it not be more prudent to show that you can effectively cad and detail?

By extension, this does also lead into my thoughts that with architectural school having such a schematic design emphasis (ie, little detail/constructability), that it's putting the cart before the horse. We get taught what we will have the chance to put into practice 10+ years from now, rather than what will immediately get us the job right out (Couldn't I just learn how to schematically design in that 10+ year interim?).

I apologize in advance if some feel I've overreached in my generalities, it is the only way I know right now to make the point. I hardly think all and every architect follows the same experience as mentioned above.

^ yes and no.

Obviously if you have some professional experience then it would be important to include that in your portfolio. I'm not sure if that is the case with this portfolio or not.

Professional experience or not, I think most employers are looking at the portfolio in a number of ways. For one, they want to see that you are able to clearly and concisely convey an idea that is both graphically pleasing as well as informative. Also they want to see that you are able to think through a problem and break it down into components. They will of course also be looking for more identifiable skills: 3D modeling, physical modeling, rendering, line drawings, etc.

Imagine working at an office and being tasked with drawing wall sections for a project. To start with you would need to determine what sections are important to explain the project, utilizing an ability to take a large problem and critically analyze it into smaller pieces. As you draw, keynote and detail these sections you need them to be legible and have the right balance of information, utilizing an ability to clearly convey information.

When you think about the content in the portfolio a little more abstractly you can see then how academic design-based projects can convey to an employer a number of other skills other than the design itself. Granted the design sensibility will come into play and may or may not weigh heavily in the decision to move forward with an interview and/or hire. Some of it comes down to gauging the office(s) and job positions you are applying to. Not every office will respond to a given project in the same way.

My approach thus far has been to tailor the work samples I send to each office. I have one master file that contains every work sample page I have made and then I select a small group depending on what it appears the position or office calls for. Each set I send out contains at least one example of a different skill (diagram, detail, render, etc.) but might be weighed more heavily towards a specific skill as the job requires. Then I provide a link to an online portfolio that is more comprehensive if the office needs to see additional work. Can't say if this is the way to go since I am currently unemployed however with so many others out on the street I don't think it's personal. (I hope!)

All in all, I think the safest way to approach your portfolio is to make sure it represents the extent of your skill set so that any given person who views it can easily see what you are capable of doing.

also make sure you check out the part 1 of the portfolio guide right here on archinect!

I'm no hiring manager, though so:

you don't have to take my word for it