Jump to content

Architect vs Designer


Wanna_be_architect
 Share

Recommended Posts

A couple of questions:

 

1.) Is there an AIA, NCARB, and 3D Visualization Registered Architect on the board?

 

2.) How many active members are there on the 3Darchitect.com web site?

 

My suspicion I may be the only. I hope I am not, but it may just be the case. If you are a member who fits the criteria, what is your experience?

 

Thanks -- Our discussion previously did give me some perspective :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

OK and allrightythen there. It seems like we have a lot of pessimists on this board. Well, I am the newbie here so I guess I will jump in and make a few enemies. Being my 2nd post I suppose I will keep it toned down a bit though.

 

If you want the easiest way, I can’t give it to you. Listen to some of the others here and just give up or give in. That is in no way an attack on their chosen professions. This field needs a lot of people to make it run at various levels of knowledge and competency. But what I hear from you is that you want options. So here it is. If you become an architect, which is not an easy thing to do, then you can do all these other jobs.

 

I spent years getting my degree so that I could have the choices later in what I wanted to do. If I want to be a cad monkey I can do it. If I want to be the lead architect I can do it. If I want to own and operate a business in architecture I can do it. Design work, can do it. My options are only now limited to what I decided it would be limited too. If you are a 35 year old architectural technician, you will never be a licensed architect. I should say there is a very small chance that you will be one. At 35 years of age you will not have the time to put into the degree and then IDP, NCARB, ARE exams etc.

 

Another point, albeit a small one, is that how many cad monkeys do you see over the age of 40. I don’t see any but that does not mean they don’t exist. At some point you need to move up or move out. I’d rather move up.

 

So if you have the time and will power it would only benefit you to get the degree and then decide at what level you want to operate at. Don’t let others fool you. Yes it is difficult and yes you can make as much if not more doing other things. But without the degree you will be limited to a certain level without the opportunity to advance much. Also, don’t forget the prestige level and pride that comes with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rktect3j,

You make some very good points. That's one thing I keep wondering: should I have bit the bullet and gone for the full architect's degree? A part of me says yes and another part says it may not be worth it. However the doors it opens can make the having the degree that much more powerful. Personally I think that if you are 40 years old and still just a CAD monkey it's not just because you don't have an architect's degree, it's because you are either lazy and not eager to learn or just plain incompetent. If you are willing to take on challenge and have some ability you can go far in this field without being an architect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rktect3j,

You make some very good points. That's one thing I keep wondering: should I have bit the bullet and gone for the full architect's degree? A part of me says yes and another part says it may not be worth it. However the doors it opens can make the having the degree that much more powerful. Personally I think that if you are 40 years old and still just a CAD monkey it's not just because you don't have an architect's degree, it's because you are either lazy and not eager to learn or just plain incompetent. If you are willing to take on challenge and have some ability you can go far in this field without being an architect.

 

I can certainly agree with that. You can go far with a bit of drive and willingness to learn and adapt to new things. However, one door will always be shut without the degree. And that door allows for many things to happen. Close that door too early and it will never be reopened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's one thing I keep wondering: should I have bit the bullet and gone for the full architect's degree? A part of me says yes and another part says it may not be worth it. However the doors it opens can make the having the degree that much more powerful.

 

Gipper,

 

You needn't feel like that door is closed forever. Your profile says your 24, which is at the young end of the scale for an MArch degree. If it's something you're passionate about, I say go for it.

 

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i will not talk about school beacuse everyone knows that you will have a great time, be it in architecture or anything else...hey it is college after all!

 

Look lets also be honest and say why the majority of the architects (with or without licence) are sad or mad or disillusioned with the profession:

 

THEY SUCK AS ARCHITECTS!!!

 

And with this I mean architect as an artist, if you ever had an opportunity to hear or read anything by the good architects then you will understand what architecture is all about, and many will laugh or push aside the idea that architects are not artist..well let me tell you that they are right in the sense that the majority of them are not artist but the ones that do understand they are true architects they are true artist. Just visit any good building by the good architects and I am not talking only of the starchitects like Ghery or Libeskind but like Lake?Flate in Texas, Rcik Joy in Tucson, Samuel Mockbee in Alabama, etc, etc. When you go to does buildings you can sense something else working in them than any other "good design: building, is the diffrence from seeing the mona lisa or a painting from thomas kinkade the artist of light (just all bulls***).

 

And yes there is a very tough road to go thru, but if you want to be more than an administrator (I have worked with principals that have an established firm and do very good money wise but they suck at architecture, they could have a managerial position anywhere else and do good as well), you have to really understand architecture, you have to go under it's skin, that is why if you follo this path you will meet some architects that may not do well money wise but thet sure are happy doing real architecture.

 

If money is your thing then honestly it will not matter what profession you choose, if you are good at making it you will make it and if you suck at making money then you will not make it anywhere, it dependes where your priorities lie in.

 

Plus, who knows, if you enter college you can change gears and like something else, isn't that the purpose of college also?

 

My adivse is that just do something dont let life dictate what will become of you, be the "architect" of your life!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer Ted and for him not to feel so lonely, I am in the process of taking my exames for the AIA and NCARB certification, have my IDP done and I am ready to go, I have scheduled to take my first examen next month and I am hiting the books pretty tough. Hopefully it will take me less than a year to achive the licence. I will let you guys know hoe it goes, maybe there is more like us in here...

 

And rktect3j I totlly agree with you point, it is the same thing that I think, and that is bascilly Just do it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone feels with the right to design.

Everyone has a possitive or [almost always] a negative oppinnion about an architects design [its too big, too small, too white, too black].

When you are with a client, he comments about his studio [on a house job], his wife thinks the kitchen can be bigger, when you believe the arguments and the design principles at that precisly moment where to do it like that.

 

An architect is that person who spents five (5) years drinking a lot of coffe at 3 in the morning, and lost the privilige of sleep, he always is at the library, at the design table, meanwhile other same age friends, are at the beach drinking beer. [of course they have another major]

So, an architectural design can be make by one person who studies history, arts, literature, has a good taste to music, food, and even has his own particular perception toward life.

 

If you asked me,
everybody can be a designer
.

But to make an architectural desgin, you must swallow principles, techniques, art and graphic, walks through the city[es] and even spend hours looking to films.

After that, architecture is an art, a technique a science.

 

To say it simple, architects are the last humanist.

The only job, that can be compared with an architect, is a film director.

He directs actors (workers), has the perception of time/space, must know about customs (materials and finishings), light, budget, has to deal with the producers (clients) to make it better and perfect with more money, has to make a clear timetable.

 

Anyway, as some other post says : Dont do it, dont start studying architecture.I add to that, study archutecture at your own risk, you are getting into trouble, it is a big responsability.

 

Dont do it if you are not sure.

If you are, ask yourself again two times more.

But dont start architecture, beacuse you think it is only design, or good hand graphics.

Remeber, anyone can do a design [good or bad, it is in the eye of the beholder]

 

Architecture, is made with time and dedication

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Afegadi had interesting points & this has gone in cirlces before & I feel rather foolish ensighting more rhetoric but: An architect has nothing to with design. Architetecture has nothing to do with "designed" buildings. There are design architects who are know for doing more artistic buildings. There are engineer architects who know very little and care very little about design, they are not artistically motivated they think of the ease a building can be built (and drafted). Most of us think of architecture and think of the really pretty buildings in the world. But most of the buildings in the world are not pretty and were done by architects. The word Archictect is a legal term for someone who has passed a test and has been granted the use of that word by the state. The term CONNOTATES design, and this can be a huge shock to students who have studied design but work in a firm where they may be using the same building over and over again in new locations and really desing never enters into the equation.

 

Something to think about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To say it simple, architects are the last humanist.

The only job, that can be compared with an architect, is a film director.

He directs actors (workers), has the perception of time/space, must know about customs (materials and finishings), light, budget, has to deal with the producers (clients) to make it better and perfect with more money, has to make a clear timetable.

 

Anyway, as some other post says : Dont do it, dont start studying architecture.I add to that, study archutecture at your own risk, you are getting into trouble, it is a big responsability.

 

Dont do it if you are not sure.

If you are, ask yourself again two times more.

But dont start architecture, beacuse you think it is only design, or good hand graphics.

Remeber, anyone can do a design [good or bad, it is in the eye of the beholder]

 

 

Thank you! This is a truly great posting. Very insightful and thoughtful.

 

The big difference between an architect and a director is that a director gets paid everytime the move is played in a theater, rented on video, and everytime the mechandise is sold. The architect gets paid only once, with real liability, and economic risk.

 

Be an architect if you really, really, really want it. Just understand that you are trying to do something extra ordinary, some beyond a job, something above the crowd, something that is exceedingly challenging, something that is way out there on the curve of difficulty. Also understand that others will make a killing off of your work and you realistically have a 1% chance of getting economic benefit from your work.

 

Over the last 15 years, I have had more fun than most people do in a career. I have worked on theme parks, hospitals, high-rise projects, stadiums, and much more. If you have been to a Disneyland or Universal Studios theme park, you have seen my work. If you have been to Las Vegas you have seen my work. If you watched the Superbowl a couple of years ago, you have seen my work. I am profoundly fulfilled by my portfolio and it stands on it's own. In addition, I have had the amazing experience of working with some of the most impressive and creative people there are. Just understand that you are choosing something difficult and challenging. It is a high-stakes bet with your personal reality.

 

Also, it is nice to see that someone on the board is at least trying to get their license. I have worked with dozens of people who have finished architecture school and not progressed through the internship, testing, and license process. Several of them have a master degree from UCLA. That is no small task of work or horsepower. To not get the extra $15K-$20 a year because you didn't have the drive or determination to get through the process is a tragedy -- especially when you are that intellectually gifted.

 

Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

architects have a responsability to make good design, and looking after that world in the world of architecture, it means that involves design, function, esthetic, solutions to problems, soluiton what the clien wants, solution to what the client wants more cheaper, solution to how much is fair for the workers, solution to neighboors, solution to his own pocket, this material didnt work, look for another, solution to the space

after the construction is made, there is two big possibilities from the world of it :

one, is it if the work is good well done, the client says : "what nice view, we did it [all of us, including him in the design table with us, those nights at 3:00 am, with coffee]"

 

two, if the work is not sattisfied: " what have you done, i dont like it, its terrible, you did it wrong"

 

why, because it is not a profession to capture, but an abstract one where everybody can say and do as they want, but only architects have to deal with reality and problems

meanwhile everyone else says without really knowing what the meant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I left architecture for many of the same reasons as the others here. Mostly, little pay and the reality that what I design will most likely not be built (I left before my ideals were shattered, but still hold on to them). I work hard regardless of what I do, so that's not a huge deal, but not being compensated for it is a significant factor that would only get worse as I got older (I am about 5 years out of grad school).

 

If you love it, then there should be no question what to do. I don't regret spending 7 years purusing it (4 yr undergrad at UF, 3 at UCLA). I love to design, and will continue to design architecture, web, graphics, etc., but I know that this field will give the most flexibility so this will be the focus.

 

Architecture is the epitome of design - there simply is no higher education for a design profession. If you play your cards right, you can move into any other design profession with little effort, and, most likely, they'll love you for being an architect (for many reasons - dedication, hard worker, logical and creative, etc.). Anything from motion graphics to web design to 3D to set design, etc., etc. You can do anything with it, but you have to plan accordingly, as no one will do it for you.

But don't forget, it's exponentially more difiicult than the other design professions. Also don't forget that there are those with talent, those that are hard workers, etc., just getting the degree does not mean you'll make pretty things, but ti's the first step in finding out if you can.

 

Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been watching this post for some time now, and I would have to say everyone has their own opinion and is quite passionate about their postion. Maybe I can give a little advice, hopefully, without making too many people angry. Especially becuase it is the people on this site which have helped me through some tough rendering questions.

 

I graduated with my Master's degree in architecture a year ago. It sound as though "wanna be architect" is much like me. Since high school I wanted to be an architect. I loved the idea of designing building which will last longer than I will, that I can leave a little bit of myself behind long after I am gone. I had several people tell me similar things as people are saying on the site about "not getting paid enough", "not being appreciated" etc. I think all of that is a bunch of talk from people who are far more interested in their egos and being rich. If you have a passion for something, then do it! Money isn't everything. If you like the idea of designing a building to make client happy and just maybe make the built environment a litte nicer, then do it. True, the schooling is very intense and maybe can only be compared to other difficult majors like medical school, or law school. However, if it is your passion you will not mind the all nighters, and the difficulty of the work.

 

Architecture is not easy becuase there isn't any right or wrong anwsers. "Good" architecture is viewed differently by different people. Most people who look down on the profession and think they are doing the same work as a "designer" are wrong. At least in my state, they are confined to working only on residential projects less than 5,000 sq. feet. They will never head a commercial project, which can be some of the most exciting projects to work on. Since graduating I have worked on a large hangar for the military, a hostpital, a vetrinary clinic, a dentist clinic, a home for developmentally disabled people etc. This is the variety I have the privalege of working on because I do have a master's degree. We have "designers" in our office who are confined to smaller projects, and a lot of CAD work for the architects etc.

 

Who's to say you can't make a lot of money at architecture? With your license the skies the limit! Does Daniel Libeskind, Steven Holl, Glenn Murcutt, Tadao Ando, etc. make a lot of money? Whey can't you become like those people? If you want to be an architect then do it! You will know early in your schooling if it's not for you. When you graduate you don't have to be an "architect". You can be a CG artist, an animator, a graphics designer etc. You may get in a firm, like I am, where you get to be all of those professions at the same time.

 

Just the thoughts of a yound AIT working on his IDP to become a licensed architect. I haven't regreted a single bit of it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be completely candid I was much like the others on the board a few years ago. That is why I had so much fun and got the great opportunity to work on so many wonderful projects and with so many wonderful people.

 

For me, everything changed when I had kids (that is my son's eye looking at you!). I guess it all comes down to what your constraints are, what your goals are, and what your values are. I think it also depends on what your location is a far as country, society, and economic base.

 

My main point is become an architect if it is your thing. Just make sure it IS your thing. When you get there you may just have a blast. That being said, the money just isn’t there given the fiscal, time, and difficulty curve. That is why I think so many ex-architects are renderers, real estate brokers, 'designers', etc. It is a fantastic education. It can be the most fun available. Just realize that the curve of importance and reward changes over your lifetime.

 

See the demographics I posted earlier in the thread, there will be less and less architects competing for the jobs ten years out when you theoretically would become licensed. So the economics may change. I recently worked at a firm with 30 people. 53% of the talent was over 50 years old. 85% of the licensed architects were over 50 years old. So when they start retiring in mass after 2010 the economic supply-demand curve would dictate a better pay scale relative to other workers**. That is of course based on the concept that design is valued by the society and doesn't just give all of the work to the developers. I think it will go that way in the U.S. It may go differently elsewhere.

 

**BIG NOTE AND DISCLAIMER: One of main economic beliefs is that the U.S. and thus the world will go through a MASSIVE economic shrink between 2010 and 2022. It may not be the great depression but it will be massive. It will mirror the shrinkage that Japan went through from 1998 to 2002. Their Dow equivalent, the NIKKEI 225, went from 37,000 to about 8,000 over 15 years. This is due to fact that 77 million baby boomers will be retiring in that period. They represent 1/3 of the current U.S. workforce. They represent a massive amount of economic power and strength and during that period will be taking from the investment and government pool instead of adding to it. When they all take the trip to the golf course it isn't going to be good for the mortgage financed and risk funded architectural business. See Bush's and Greenspan's discussions for people more informed than I.

 

"Do you want the red pill or the blue pill?" -- Morpheus, The Matrix

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am new to this forum so take what I have to say with a grain of salt!

 

I am an Industrial designer by education (Arizona State '78) my specialty was automotive stylist! To date I have never worked in the field of Auto Design.

 

When I got out of the military the US was in a recession and there was not a job to be found in the Auto Industry. I bounced around for about a year doing freelance renderings (yes by hand), designing commercial interiors, small product design, photography for agencies and then I landed a job designing tradeshow exhibits. I am now in my 25th year in the exhibit industry. 12 of those years as a designer. I have learned one thing over the years...

 

A designer or architect is someone who can take a problem, create a solution and package it so human beings can work and play within it's intended purpose.

 

As many of you will attest it takes a good eye to be an illustrator. But it takes a special mind set to be a designer of any sort. You can't just have the eye you need to understand how people think and interact with their environment.

 

Color psychology was a class I used to think was the biggest waste of my time. Now I use it to create moods and productivity or the lack thereof!

 

Follow your dream! What an old cliche' but quite true. I would still be kicking myself if I hadn't become a designer!

 

eaglemac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many people have moved into the 3d digital field of architecture...have 3D firms, etc. Which is expected on a 3D architecture site. Where is there more $$$? As a student I enjoy both and without a doubt will go into the architecture field and pursue my professional degree because it is WHAT I LOVE AND CAN SEE CAN'T SEE MYSELF DOING ANYTHING ELSE. But who has practiced both, where is there more $$$ at? (owning a cg firm, or owning and architecture firm)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..........

 

**BIG NOTE AND DISCLAIMER: One of main economic beliefs is that the U.S. and thus the world will go through a MASSIVE economic shrink between 2010 and 2022. It may not be the great depression but it will be massive. It will mirror the shrinkage that Japan went through from 1998 to 2002. Their Dow equivalent, the NIKKEI 225, went from 37,000 to about 8,000 over 15 years. This is due to fact that 77 million baby boomers will be retiring in that period. They represent 1/3 of the current U.S. workforce. They represent a massive amount of economic power and strength and during that period will be taking from the investment and government pool instead of adding to it. When they all take the trip to the golf course it isn't going to be good for the mortgage financed and risk funded architectural business. See Bush's and Greenspan's discussions for people more informed than I.

......

 

 

Actually, that's not entirely true.

 

From an economic point of view, what you've said about the predicted economic shrink between 2010 and 2022 has some merit based on projections of certain sections of the global economy and world markets, hence the reason it's a popular belief among the economic propellorheads in such places as the Whartons and the Havard business schools. However, what most economists tend to overlook is often what ultimately tends to have a greater significance in world development. In this particular case, the model for your argument ( Japan's own economic shrink between '98 and '02) is an innaccurate analogy for said reasons; which are the sociological and socio-economic rather than purely economic. The biggest reason that Japan's economy flatlined the way it did had to do with the way Japanese society is structured and how their economy developed around it. And it had also been long predicted and foreseen almost as far back as the sixties by sociologists and anthropologists and not by economists. Japan is a very insular culture with a strong nationalist sense as a society. This, coupled with the fact that the focus and value on family and child-bearing decreased among the baby-boomer geneation, as the country become more technnologically advanced ( as naturally tends to happen in developed countries) resulted in a population demograph in the form of an inverted pyramid or triangle. Which means, that by the mid-nineties when Japan was at the height of its economic prowess right before the shrink, the proportion of the number of people in their society supporting the economy and developing the country, greatly outnumbered the number of individuals ( the youth) that was supposed to come in after them and not only support the economy in their stead but also support them in retirement. But everybody knows this; the only difference is that the shrink happened much earlier than anticipated as opposed to when it was expected to hit, you guessed it, between 2010-2022. Now the common assumption tends to be that, the same thing will happen to the rest of the world (or the developed world for that matter) and in the US in particular, as the rest of the global economy catches up with the Asian mid-nineties behemoth economic market. But like I said, before, the difference is in the details and in this particular case, the aforementioned insularity of Japan's society has for the longest period of history made it a borderline hostile environment for a non-indegenous yet skilled and youthful global yuppie to consider to want to settle in. If a society is not going to naturally grow through child-birth and a healthy fertility rate, then it has to grow through external inflow (immigration). On the first account (childbirth) the focus by Japanese baby-boomers on their careers as opposed to starting and having families hasn't particularly helped. While on the second count, Japan as an insular society hasn't exactly done an outstanding job in selling itself as a destination for potential and young skilled immigrant workers. In addition to having to learn what's possibly, the most difficult language for anglo, and Latin-language speakers to learn, the prospect of trying to fit into a society that perpetually looks down on outsiders, does not a joe-engineer ot joe-architect endear nor make to want to settle in Japan. The rest of the world and in particular America, doesn't suffer from this problem. In fact the US if anything suffers from the opposite problem. Pre-9/11 America was probably one of the world's foremost destination for skilled immigrants to settle in, with the prospect of pursuing the"American dream" and life prosperity greater than anywhere else on earth. This, in addition to the fact that the US, as it now stands, already has a healthy fertility and child-bearing rate, (and with less Americans inclined to emigrate to other countries to boot), the inverted-pyamid phenomenom with a heavy economy and retirement class having to be supported by a smaller section of their population, is not one that is likely to happen Stateside anytime soon. Other parts of the world with similar social structures to Japan, such as, and in particular, Scandinavian European countries are likely to undergo the same fate as Japan. And in fact in notable cases such as Denmark, Sweden and even Norway, there is a concerted and ongoing effort currently underway to loosen immigration laws to in hopes of easing the projected crunch when the current labour force of their societies' retires.

So while the global economy has greatly helped benefit countries like Japan, it conversely serves as bitterly ironic that they become victims of one of the most characteristic features of a more intergrated global village; which is that the integral parts of the world can no longer afford to exist as purely insular societies but increasingly have to depend on other parts of the world with their own nationalist values notwithstanding.

 

And while I don't want to get into partisan politics, I also tend to believe that Bush's views regarding the American Social security system are a bit overblown and unwarranted for this stage of the american economic development. But even in his or Greenspan's case, the collapse they foresee is in 40-50 years as opposed to 5-15 years.

 

But in light of the current discussion, your points regarding the vulnerability of architecture as a profession to shaky economic and market forces, is right on point. And I agree with you that anyone getting into this profession with the primary intent of making money or gaining noteriety and celebrity status, is seriously misguided. Anyone getting into architecture should get into the profession because they love to design buildings as well as the construction process and not because they hope to get rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what Ted is trying to say is:

Architecture is not the glamorous career it is made out to be on TV and movies.

 

It is long, tedious, usually thankless work. For every project or architect you see in magazines and interviews - there are 100s out there working 60-80 (or more) hours a week. The pay is on the lower end of professional services (fees are not), and most clients don't really place much value on the service.... again - those top 10% of architects that can pick and choose who to work for can avoid this, but the rest of us are doing crappy spec architecture on bottom dollar budgets.

 

If you go to the right school, the education is a good one. I wouldn't have chosen anything else. The rest you can figure out later....

 

Good Luck.

a

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Who's to say you can't make a lot of money at architecture? With your license the skies the limit! Does Daniel Libeskind, Steven Holl, Glenn Murcutt, Tadao Ando, etc. make a lot of money?

 

 

I am not sure Tado Ando have his license?!

I heard he didn't even go through architecture school for his education, and somehow he got there. (he is now a professor at Tokyo Univeristy) In most countries I thought you must graduated from a an arch school first and work for certain amount of hours before been able to go through the procedures of registering for licensing exam.

 

 

http://www.mamfw.org/ando_resume.html

1962-69 Self-educated in architecture

Traveled in the United States, Europe and Africa

1969 Established Tadao Ando Architect & Associates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been following this thread from the beginning, so after investing in the time it took to read each message I figured I should throw my experience into the mix.

 

First off... Cole, I think you should pursue the architectural degree as a minimum. It really is a well-rounded program that will serve you well no matter where you land. You sound plenty capable and it would be a shame to waste the opportunity if you can make it happen. You should be commended for your engaging curiosity.

 

 

I received my architectural degree from Texas A&M in 1991. One of the best Architectural schools around. I gathered all the requirements to start taking the exam years later in the state of Arizona where I currently live. I received my letter from the state board to begin taking the tests... and about three weeks ago, my five year allotment of time expired without me taking a single one. I have a beautiful six-year-old daughter and my own 3D Viz company instead. My point is this...

 

 

You can continue working toward your goals, but there are no guarantees that your goals will not change. Hopefully they will shift only slightly as to make each progressive step in your journey more meaningful. We all reach a jumping off point eventually when it comes to putting together our credential toolset. For some it means holding multiple doctorates and fellowships, while I know others with their associate’s degrees earning more money.

 

 

As others have said, college will NOT be something you regret (unless you don't finish). Just don't hang out too long soul-searching and acquire too much debt. Work summers, live off campus, have a part time job. Don't take it too seriously once you're there. I don't agree with some of the other posts that make an architectural degree harder than most. I can vividly recall many of my friends in other degree programs pissing and moaning about memorizing tomes of chemistry Latin while I was pulling all-nighters with the TV on, drinking my weight in Mountain Dew, while building a scale model. Ooh, that was tough.

DO research the differences between a 4+2 year program and a 5 year program and how they are handled in the state you plan to call home.

I can see now why so many posts here have gone on and on. You've really struck a nerve.

The only other topic, which should really be a lesser concern to you at this stage, is the industry as a whole. I've worked in firms where they expect you to hit the ground running on pursuing licensing. The more registered Architects they have on their roster, the better they look to their clients. They'll usually never ask you to break out your stamp and seal a drawing for the firm, and they may not even pay your AIA dues, but they'll expect it to be in your bio eventually. I've also worked at a firm where neither of the principals ever even finished college and had obtained their licenses after years in the trenches. They could care less if their army of CAD soldiers were pursuing registration. They actually preferred the opposite to keep salary expectations low. It will be the same in any industry. Just stay confident in your abilities and keep visualizing your future.

 

And so on and so on...

That's all my time folks I hear the orchestra cueing me off the mic.

 

 

Good luck with whatever you choose,

 

 

-Darrin Sabin

 

 

 

 

Darrin Sabin

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go on over to http://www.archinect.com and you'll find TONS of people that are emotional about this, mostly because architecture, as a profession, makes a lot of people bitter.

 

Licensure is stupid, imho. It does nothing back make it more difficult to be an architect and make money for the AIA, NCARB, etc. It certainly has NOTHING to do with being a good architect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who's to say you can't make a lot of money at architecture? With your license the skies the limit! Does Daniel Libeskind, Steven Holl, Glenn Murcutt, Tadao Ando, etc. make a lot of money? Whey can't you become like those people? If you want to be an architect then do it!

 

Actually being a "famous" architect is a lot like being a "famous" actor. The average salary of a SAG actor (screen actors guild) is around $30k. Sound familiar? Yet all you hear about is that Will Smith made X million on that movies, and Tom Hanks made 10X million on that other film. Less then 1% of the actors make that sorta money. The same is true for architects. Not to discourage you... Everyone has potential and can grow. I just found that my potential and growth was on a slightly different road. And I am pretty sure Tadao Ando, and Steven Holl don't have a license. In fact, many famous architects are not licensed. People like Steven Holl probably makes more lecturing than building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really an aside note but when Chris sats average is 30K for an actor that is WITH Tom Hanks figures in the average. Average for actors equity (stage actors) members is in 4 digits I think. Sorry I went to NYU Tisch for acting :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...