I want to apply for MIT MArch course. I already failed once, and I want you to roast this as hard as possible, no hold backs please.
Please tell me everything that's not worth keeping. Anything that might have enough to be redrawn, and the types of projects I lack.
Currently, I feel that my projects lack visual impact and wow factor for an architecture portfolio. Maybe I need more abstract architectural projects.
Thanks
midlander
Oct 9, 21 7:42 am
1. Your MIT application portfolio says "Harvard Application" on the cover.
2. you start with an anodyne rendering of a toilet-seat perspective... and then proceed to an uninteresting thing with art panels in some japanese building.
3. Several pages of complex diagrams of things no one cares about and which seem unrelated to the work preceding or following.
4. You cram in a bunch of wonderful fascinating drawings of complex projects with no sense of appreciation for which parts are interesting versus tedious.
5. Then an awkward louis kahn derivative design unrelated to everything else you've done, and given far more space than it's worth.
6. Conclude with crappy photos of some blue dark space and a table.
7. But it's not over. There are some very pretty little sculpture things.
Somewhere in the middle of this portfolio are several interesting, complex, fluid designs which seem to relate to the little sculpture things at the end. Those are great, focus on them. That shows something about your vision as a designer.
Everything else I don't care about at all. None of it shows any deep thought, it just seems like you put them in to prove you completed some courses.
The toilet view could be the edgy and clever opening to an ironic critical portfolio. But none of your work is ironic or critical. So instead it's just a weird and uncomfortable view that makes you seem immature, like my son who tells fart jokes before any serious discussion. Remove it - put in something meaningful to you as a designer.
vicyvic
Oct 9, 21 3:55 pm
Hi, thankyou very much for your very valid points! I think one of my weaknesses is that I don't understand what people's interests lies, so I never know what to focus on.
vicyvic
Oct 9, 21 3:57 pm
Could I ask for your further kindness to elaborate on what are the tedious bits and what are the interesting bits? (Or maybe quicker, just what are the interesting drawings, as I guess most of them are pretty crap in the portfolio)
hiall
Oct 9, 21 6:12 pm
the attitude of this type of portfolio will put your application to the trash can right off the bat. I mean, you are trying so hard to be clever and creative, showing gimmick points of view and nonsense ideas. It's not about the quality of your word, it looks great, delivers meaningful projects with the more rigorous processes in the design. Please don't put the toilet on the first page, put your most serious project at first. This portfolio could get you in GSAPP, UPENN, but Harvard and MIT, you need to reconsider.
midlander
Oct 9, 21 8:11 pm
@op the point of a portfolio is to show where your interests lie. spend a few hours and write a two sentence summary of what is special and important about your ideas on design that distinguishes you from most other qualified candidates. your drawing quality and rendering skills are excellent, and the projects all show adequate complexity and design ambition. what the portfolio lacks is any sense what your personal vision as an architect is. to do that you'll need to cut out the things you don't really believe or care about. my impression is that the two colorful sculptures at the end show more clearly about what you really care for then everything else in here. but there are a few of the projects in the middle which are twisted and spatially complex that i think can relate. there is enough drawing squeezed in there too densely that you could have a good 20 page portfolio with only 2-3 projects plus some of your art.
https://issuu.com/vicy328/docs...
I want to apply for MIT MArch course. I already failed once, and I want you to roast this as hard as possible, no hold backs please.
Please tell me everything that's not worth keeping. Anything that might have enough to be redrawn, and the types of projects I lack.
Currently, I feel that my projects lack visual impact and wow factor for an architecture portfolio. Maybe I need more abstract architectural projects.
Thanks
1. Your MIT application portfolio says "Harvard Application" on the cover.
2. you start with an anodyne rendering of a toilet-seat perspective... and then proceed to an uninteresting thing with art panels in some japanese building.
3. Several pages of complex diagrams of things no one cares about and which seem unrelated to the work preceding or following.
4. You cram in a bunch of wonderful fascinating drawings of complex projects with no sense of appreciation for which parts are interesting versus tedious.
5. Then an awkward louis kahn derivative design unrelated to everything else you've done, and given far more space than it's worth.
6. Conclude with crappy photos of some blue dark space and a table.
7. But it's not over. There are some very pretty little sculpture things.
Somewhere in the middle of this portfolio are several interesting, complex, fluid designs which seem to relate to the little sculpture things at the end. Those are great, focus on them. That shows something about your vision as a designer.
Everything else I don't care about at all. None of it shows any deep thought, it just seems like you put them in to prove you completed some courses.
The toilet view could be the edgy and clever opening to an ironic critical portfolio. But none of your work is ironic or critical. So instead it's just a weird and uncomfortable view that makes you seem immature, like my son who tells fart jokes before any serious discussion. Remove it - put in something meaningful to you as a designer.
Hi, thankyou very much for your very valid points! I think one of my weaknesses is that I don't understand what people's interests lies, so I never know what to focus on.
Could I ask for your further kindness to elaborate on what are the tedious bits and what are the interesting bits? (Or maybe quicker, just what are the interesting drawings, as I guess most of them are pretty crap in the portfolio)
the attitude of this type of portfolio will put your application to the trash can right off the bat. I mean, you are trying so hard to be clever and creative, showing gimmick points of view and nonsense ideas. It's not about the quality of your word, it looks great, delivers meaningful projects with the more rigorous processes in the design. Please don't put the toilet on the first page, put your most serious project at first. This portfolio could get you in GSAPP, UPENN, but Harvard and MIT, you need to reconsider.
@op the point of a portfolio is to show where your interests lie. spend a few hours and write a two sentence summary of what is special and important about your ideas on design that distinguishes you from most other qualified candidates. your drawing quality and rendering skills are excellent, and the projects all show adequate complexity and design ambition. what the portfolio lacks is any sense what your personal vision as an architect is. to do that you'll need to cut out the things you don't really believe or care about. my impression is that the two colorful sculptures at the end show more clearly about what you really care for then everything else in here. but there are a few of the projects in the middle which are twisted and spatially complex that i think can relate. there is enough drawing squeezed in there too densely that you could have a good 20 page portfolio with only 2-3 projects plus some of your art.