I am applying to architectural graduate schools across Canada and would really appreciate the community's feedback and constructive criticism.
I have a background from a technological institution and have a Bachelor of Technology in Architectural Science.
My main driver for the portfolio is to convey my abilities, skills, potential, design 2d,3d thinking etc., personality, interests and breadth of exploration with different mediums to convey ideas
Schools I am applying to are as follows:
University of Toronto - (Urban location and faculty connections with the states will be beneficial)
University of British Columbia (Close to home, good campus environment, interesting projects from what I've seen, and diversity in classmates)
University of Calgary (Close to home, interesting design oriented projects)
University of Manitoba (My backup if all else fails, but I hear they do interesting research on concrete)
Decent work for non barch background. u of t or ubc should be where to concentrate. Ignore the other two.
I would remove the question mark sketch on the cover and reduce the pages dedicated to photography. Everyone thinks themselves a photographer, concentrate on sketches instead.
Cobb webs
Dec 28, 15 7:05 pm
@ Non Sequitur, thank you for the feedback!
I have been concentrating my portfolio contents primarily on the requirements for UBC and UofT to what the admissions would be seeking from potential applicants. I understand that my tech background may have a stigma attached hence why I would wish to prove the admissions otherwise in my portfolio.
I've noticed a trend on the forums here that including photography in the portfolio is discouraged. However, I do believe the subject matter could be very subjective as I have received comments from an acquaintance (practicing architect/ educator in many arch schools) to encourage me to include my photography. While I have my own reservations on my technical abilities in photography, my main intent is to convey my perspective.
StevenZhang
Dec 29, 15 2:06 am
The best cover I have seen, Destination UofT!!!
I saw an Alex Hogrefe in your portfolio. That is the reason why you should remove the photographs. These photos are good, but are not good enough comparing to your drawing. The aesthetic consciousness is important rather than technique, but these photos try to told people that you do not understand what is beactiful.
Overall, it is an impressive portfolio, so the photos are not a big problem. Good luck!
Cobb webs
Dec 29, 15 4:14 am
@ StevenZhang, thank you for the kind words!
I do have to credit Alex Hogrefe's tutorials in aiding me to be able to produce the renders. His how-to guides were incredibly helpful in that it taught me to pay attention to detailed layer management on PS and SU.
I'm thinking that I may be reducing the photography pages and concentrate more on the other drawings / projects instead.
bowling_ball
Dec 29, 15 6:06 am
The concrete research at UManitoba ain't what it used to be, as the director took a position at MIT this year. Just a heads up.
Hi there,
I am applying to architectural graduate schools across Canada and would really appreciate the community's feedback and constructive criticism.
I have a background from a technological institution and have a Bachelor of Technology in Architectural Science.
My main driver for the portfolio is to convey my abilities, skills, potential, design 2d,3d thinking etc., personality, interests and breadth of exploration with different mediums to convey ideas
Schools I am applying to are as follows:
University of Toronto - (Urban location and faculty connections with the states will be beneficial)
University of British Columbia (Close to home, good campus environment, interesting projects from what I've seen, and diversity in classmates)
University of Calgary (Close to home, interesting design oriented projects)
University of Manitoba (My backup if all else fails, but I hear they do interesting research on concrete)
Link: http://issuu.com/cobbwebs/docs/port_5th_8_redacted
Cheers,
- Cobbwebs
Decent work for non barch background. u of t or ubc should be where to concentrate. Ignore the other two.
I would remove the question mark sketch on the cover and reduce the pages dedicated to photography. Everyone thinks themselves a photographer, concentrate on sketches instead.
@ Non Sequitur, thank you for the feedback!
I have been concentrating my portfolio contents primarily on the requirements for UBC and UofT to what the admissions would be seeking from potential applicants. I understand that my tech background may have a stigma attached hence why I would wish to prove the admissions otherwise in my portfolio.
I've noticed a trend on the forums here that including photography in the portfolio is discouraged. However, I do believe the subject matter could be very subjective as I have received comments from an acquaintance (practicing architect/ educator in many arch schools) to encourage me to include my photography. While I have my own reservations on my technical abilities in photography, my main intent is to convey my perspective.
The best cover I have seen, Destination UofT!!!
I saw an Alex Hogrefe in your portfolio. That is the reason why you should remove the photographs. These photos are good, but are not good enough comparing to your drawing. The aesthetic consciousness is important rather than technique, but these photos try to told people that you do not understand what is beactiful.
Overall, it is an impressive portfolio, so the photos are not a big problem. Good luck!
@ StevenZhang, thank you for the kind words!
I do have to credit Alex Hogrefe's tutorials in aiding me to be able to produce the renders. His how-to guides were incredibly helpful in that it taught me to pay attention to detailed layer management on PS and SU.
I'm thinking that I may be reducing the photography pages and concentrate more on the other drawings / projects instead.
The concrete research at UManitoba ain't what it used to be, as the director took a position at MIT this year. Just a heads up.
@ bowling_ball
Thanks for the heads up!