6 ms·

A portfolio isn't something you just have and it does all the work for you. It's a living and evolving thing that is there to show that you can solve problems.

A portfolio isn't something you just have and it does all the work for you. It's a living and evolving thing that is there to show that you can solve problems. A portfolio says "I encountered X problem and here's what I did about it to make this other thing and therefore solved X problem." A web dev is a very easy job to create a portfolio for because the product can be your portfolio but when I say 'portfolio' I'm not talking about a GitHub repo of some code you've written, I'm talking about something bigger than that. I'm talking about having examples of your code, things you've made, perhaps technical writing, perhaps a personal project, perhaps video or other 'evidence' of the programmers work/approach. If that involves making a personal embedded hardware project to show your approach then that's what's needed. Perhaps another important attitude change needs to be established... In a creative technical art you are not really selling your 'product' to customers. You are selling yourself. You're selling your ability to solve problems and it's incumbent on the individual to prove their ability. Web devs aren't 'selling' their previously created websites, they're 'selling' their ability to create those past projects. It's a crucial distinction and programmers would do well to adopt this distinction - they're not 'selling' their GitHub repo for instance, they're using that as an example of how they (their mind?) work to solve problems. For sure there will be times you work on proprietary/secret stuff or on systems of such scale you can't possibly make an equivalent scale of personal project. But you can demonstrate your ability and sell yourself, and that's really the key to it all. You have to get to the point in a creative career where you realise you aren't just selling your final product, you're selling yourself, your approach and your way of solving a problem. Finding a way to do that is how you get the job ahead of someone else.

Dayshine 10y ago
Could you make a Photography portfolio without any photographs? You're allowed to include sketches, because you have time to make those for personal projects. But no photographs because they're all proprietary.
- PuffinBlue 10y ago
  This analogy makes no sense. I often encountered situations where clients wanted to keep photos 'private'. I couldn't use them in my portfolio. To deal with that I took my camera and lenses (analogous to a computer) and made some equivalents that allowed me to demonstrate my skill in a similar way (analogous to writing some code in a personal project). Suggesting you should sketch something to show your photo making ability is like writing pseudo code to say you can write python - it's an unrealistic analogy that doesn't happen and has no need to happen. You can very easily use a camera or a computer for a personal project and make very real photographs or write very real code to demonstrate your ability.
  - mathgeek 10y ago
    Think of "the photographs" in the analogy as the code that a full-time developer with a wife, kids, and non-coding hobbies has produced for his/her employer over the last five years. This person may produce a script or a basic website for a portfolio, but those 40+ hours a week spent coding at a full time job is where all of the real problems get solved.
    - PuffinBlue 10y ago
      > This person may produce a script or a basic website for a portfolio, but those 40+ hours a week spent coding at a full time job is where all of the real problems get solved. That's it right there. That's the bit that makes the difference. It speaks to an attitude of 'I'm doing it, I don't need to prove it'. It's wrapped up in 'I'm doing it and I'm too busy to prove it because I should have a life and other people should just recognise my ability so I don't have to sacrifice my lifestyle to put the effort in to get the job I want"...but it really comes down to thinking I shouldn't have to show it because I'm doing it. There's no can't show it inherent in your original statement. There's a large dollop of don't want but no can't. You can find ways to prove you ability, to use work you do day to day, to make high quality personal projects or contribute to those that are already running (beauty of programming is it can be easier to collaborate like this and still show your skill). It can be done. Plenty of people in all industries work one job and study, prepare or work towards another all whilst supporting families and trying to have a life. Programmers aren't special snowflakes, they've got to work just as hard at selling themselves as all other people in the creative industries do. That's why I think programmers really need to grasp that they actually are creatives and adopt an attitude that deals with all the burdens that moniker brings with it.

Dayshine 10y ago

Could you make a Photography portfolio without any photographs? You're allowed to include sketches, because you have time to make those for personal projects. But no photographs because they're all proprietary.

PuffinBlue 10y ago
This analogy makes no sense. I often encountered situations where clients wanted to keep photos 'private'. I couldn't use them in my portfolio. To deal with that I took my camera and lenses (analogous to a computer) and made some equivalents that allowed me to demonstrate my skill in a similar way (analogous to writing some code in a personal project). Suggesting you should sketch something to show your photo making ability is like writing pseudo code to say you can write python - it's an unrealistic analogy that doesn't happen and has no need to happen. You can very easily use a camera or a computer for a personal project and make very real photographs or write very real code to demonstrate your ability.
- mathgeek 10y ago
  Think of "the photographs" in the analogy as the code that a full-time developer with a wife, kids, and non-coding hobbies has produced for his/her employer over the last five years. This person may produce a script or a basic website for a portfolio, but those 40+ hours a week spent coding at a full time job is where all of the real problems get solved.
  - PuffinBlue 10y ago
    > This person may produce a script or a basic website for a portfolio, but those 40+ hours a week spent coding at a full time job is where all of the real problems get solved. That's it right there. That's the bit that makes the difference. It speaks to an attitude of 'I'm doing it, I don't need to prove it'. It's wrapped up in 'I'm doing it and I'm too busy to prove it because I should have a life and other people should just recognise my ability so I don't have to sacrifice my lifestyle to put the effort in to get the job I want"...but it really comes down to thinking I shouldn't have to show it because I'm doing it. There's no can't show it inherent in your original statement. There's a large dollop of don't want but no can't. You can find ways to prove you ability, to use work you do day to day, to make high quality personal projects or contribute to those that are already running (beauty of programming is it can be easier to collaborate like this and still show your skill). It can be done. Plenty of people in all industries work one job and study, prepare or work towards another all whilst supporting families and trying to have a life. Programmers aren't special snowflakes, they've got to work just as hard at selling themselves as all other people in the creative industries do. That's why I think programmers really need to grasp that they actually are creatives and adopt an attitude that deals with all the burdens that moniker brings with it.