I bet it might actually be refreshing not to see that for a change. Collage can be pretty effective

Professors hate that shit anyway -- well only if it's REALLY good and useful for your project.

They'll love you if you make physical models and hand-draft!

save the 3d for work.

hand drafting and models?! for real! that's refreshing to hear. I just figured that all the glitz I am seeing in competitions and my colleagues portfolios was being translated into the academic world too.

I'm at Penn and my portfolio has nothing you could call a "sleek rendering"

It's mostly hand drawings, photocollage, diagram, etc.

i always hate this topic. its about how you think and design, not the graphic or drawing technique used. Spend time worrying about best representing your work no matter what technique used.

i was at a job interview a few days back and i was complimented on the fact that i had hand drawings in my portfolio... (even though, well, they are more like scratches made in charcoal/pastels/colored pencils).

nostalgia is nostalgia.

I got into SCI-Arc, a school that has a reputation for glossy renderings and extravagant digital models, with a portfolio that had zero computer generated projects, not even autocad. All of it was physical models, hand drafting, acrylic and ink diagrams, photos, etc.

As said, the thought it what counts not the way in which it was packaged.

3d renderings is just for the 'money shot'

there's sooo many more ways to show your work....

i was also accepted to a highly ranked grad school and didn't have renderings....just saying

it all depends on the projects that you are doing and what you want to show. I was hired once on the spot because of one maya rendering. It is just another tool in my toolbox. And it's true that teachers often don't fully appreciate computer renderings, they think it's so easy; you just click a button and a photographic version of your project comes out. focus on the ideas and develop the skills that you need to express those ideas, that's all that counts.

If you showed a bunch of renderings to the admissions committee at my old school, they'd probably just toss your portfolio in the rubbish basket.... Not to say I completely agree with that attitude (a healthy mix of digital work, physical models, study models, freehand sketches, technical illustration, photography, montage, film, etc. are all nice to see), but it means you won't be at a disadvantage, just as long as you aren't lacking in other means of effectively conveying your thoughts, ideas, process, and attitudes towards design.

Check out the work from places such as UCL Bartlett or Cooper Union for example... Very high quality work for the most part, with little emphasis on glossy renderings...which isn't to say that they aren't VERY much into the image / end product...just that it isn't your typical photo-real render.

Good luck with admissions!

Also everyone does things differently.

As mentioned above, the method doesn't matter, just that your thinking is beautifully presented. And in the case of hand drawings/models, that means the photography should be exceptional as well. And the graphic design.

I think schools are much more interested in seeing how you think, not how good your technical skills are, or which medium you've invested in.

Also, in this intellectual climate of fetishing technology, a portfolio w/o digital models and renders is actually more attractive to admissions boards. It means they can more easily mold or at least influence your process. Rather than having to re-learn things, so to speak.

Also, I'm pretty sure they don't care about you knowing techniques a priori when you will pick it up in your first semester anyway.

I was in a similar position when I applied a few years ago for a post professional program (lots of models and hand drafting). My sense is that the schools see past the glitz of a flashy rendering ... unfortunately I'm finding that the professional world does not. Make sure the concepts are clear and that it represents how you think and approach a problem. Once you get in then take the opportunity to learn some of the tools that will benefit you in the professional realm. I',m a firm believer in fighting against a software program or two defining our profession...it seems that (especially in large firms) the image is becoming more important than the architecture...it's no longer a means to an end, but becoming an end in itself.

ya. i get the sense i will need to make an effort to pick up the rendering skills during school to be more marketable afterwords.

focus on learning to model fast and well. i can teach anyone how to render nicely in 2 hours.

kitkat, this thread made my day...

haha. glad to hear that AtelierTabulaRasa. it made mine too!

this is funny. I hear people complaining about this all the time. yet it's CLEARLY an advantage to have more physical/hand drawn stuff in your portfolio. I, on the underhand, am VERY worried that my portfolio will include way too many computer-driven images. my problem is I used my hands alot at the beginning of my undergrad, but then after my first year switched to 90% computer because of the fast paced (quarter system) and large-scaled nature of my studio projects. Of course the projects in the later, computer-driven days, of my education are much more developed as designs and are the only ones I feel comfortable showing.

I feel there will be an immediate and natural tendency for the selection committee to frown upon my portfolio because of this.

I'm applying to M.Arch I, I heard from someone that GSAPP will outright reject anyone who doesn't have digital stuff in their portfolio... so what's a non-Arch background supposed to do? I did some hand drafting stuff in an Arch course, I was gonna try and re-do it on AutoCad. But now they LIKE hand drafting!?

Also, about PHOTOCOLLAGE... what exactly is that? I thought we should keep our portfolios on the crisp/clean side... photocollage brings to mind chaotic....


Any advice?

I cannot imagine thats the truth, I think you were misled. I doubt redoing your hand drawings into cad is going to make them any better....i'd focus your efforts elsewhere (but thats just my advice).

A photocollage can mean lots of things, depends on the context. there are plenty of "clean" photocollages. also, they could be refering to a rendering thats photoshoped...in a way thats a photocollage...

I wouldnt worry too much about what other people say about portfolios. just do what you think is sensible, looks goos, and gets your thoughts across in a coherent way.

that's a bizarre myth about gsapp! my hunch is gsapp admissions enjoys looking at handdrawings as the next school.

my port had little digital content (scant illustrator), and i'm a first year here.

this is all lipstick on a pig kind of stuff.

good design and evidence of intelligence gets you into good schools. how you present it is irrelevant.


i will say that if you can't do 3d and want to work in our office right now i would pass on the opportunity to hire you. i didn't think this was important a year ago but have learned otherwise as our time becomes more difficult to manage and we get more work. i just don't have the time to teach people to use 3d software nor cad. both are without a doubt a necessity to practice.

if your school is not preparing you for this basic stuff you should think twice about your education. though there are some skills that carry over, in all honesty hand drafting is worthless to me. some offices may use it, but having come from that background myself i can attest that it is not the most efficient. i don't miss the hand drafting for a minute.

hand drawing is useful. but right now i prefer 3d skills. simple fact of life.

Personally, I found designing in 3D to be the largest asset - I can just design so much faster than building models or sketches (although I do those too).

In the end, as jump points out, it is about the design. Too often 3D looks cheap and shallow, imho, too easy to hide errors or parts you didn't think through.

I learned 3D for jobs (and this was a looong time ago!). I would expect anyone coming out nowadays to be good at 3D.

photocollage or maybe just collage:


http://www.gingerhuebner.com/portfolio/power.html


ginger was a classmate of mine in grad school. her collages are amazing. no computers used...but that's the point.

i would say to the original point of this thread. learn whatever methods of expressing your ideas you can. if, after trying different techniques, you decide to stick with 3d computer renderings, or freehand sketching with charcoal, or making massing models out of plaster, or ink on mylar...you'll be better for it.

i did horrible rendering(in fact, no rendering but control+paste images, and even collage materials on the surface of wall, with strange strange strange running female modles collaged on the images for my portfolio...)

the professors get curious and interviewd me(that he only interviewed two candidates, another one was a national scholarship student with national top engineer Dad background), and i got an offer in the AA. then my computing skills were boosted there... and i still dont care about rendering, now i use it as a design tool rather than rendering(representation) tool.

as long as design are thoughtful, they would value you for what you have put into your study and education... no worry for a single skill that is not honed yet.. honestly, maybe u will never need it...

why don't you learn now? it would probably be a good idea. sketchup is easy and will do photorealist rendering. you may be left in the dust (depending on the class) without the ability to cook up quick visualizations.

I am sorry about reposting this but it is sooo relevant to this thread too.

http://famousarchitect.blogspot.com/2009/10/what-is-important-in-starchitecture.html