Yet another CV critique thread!

_Gizka_

_Gizka_

_Gizka_

Associate
Joined
9 Jun 2009
Posts
1,142
Location
Leeds
Good evening OcUK, this afternon I have knocked out a quick CV which I will forward to architectural practices. The CV will be in a booklet type format, so one A3 folded with a front cover if that makes sense. Just thought id post it here to get some advice and feedback, some of you may be more equipped to give me feedback regarding presentation and colour scheme etc.

Thanks in advance

2yyv8eo.jpg


j8flt0.jpg


UPDATE: I've made some of the changes suggested and if you are seeing a CV with blue font that is the updated version. I feel its a bit more tidier and concise and there isn't any word mirroring fail this time. Also, I don't really understand writing the "About me" section in third person, i've never been good at writing or anything so I am a bit unsure about that.

On the creative front, I know its not a traditional CV in a sense, seeing as its a creative industry I am applying for this kind of thing shows of some skills at the same time, at least I hope so.

Thanks again for all the feedback, very much appreciated.
 
Last edited:
"about me" should be a profile written in the third person.

Drop the rubbish word mirroring. Overall it also looks too flash, it's a CV not a GCSE "let's play with publisher" exercise.

Are you actually scoring yourself on ability by using some sort of videogame like bar system?
 
Last edited:
I have to say, the layout is cool though I appreciate maybe not to all tastes. I'm not sure on the About Me section- it reads like a million other CVs. Making that bit unique and interesting is very, very tricky though. I've never read a good one!
 
I don't think the layout is ideal for a CV, it leaves to much down to personal taste which will more than likely count against you. Keep it simple and tasteful. Also you are writing in the first person which tends not to be recommended.
 
I think the layout is good and is whats needed in the creative industries.

Personally Id lose the word mirroring though.

One small thing I notice when skimming
1st Class
2:1 Class

In my mind it should read
First Class
Upper Second Class
 
Personally, as a CV I don't like it.

Too 'flashy' and confusing, when an employer has 100+ CVs to read through taking the time to decipher yours isn't going to be high on their list.

Not doubting it looks nice, although not a fan of the reverse wording, looks very cool design wise. Just not what I'd want to see in a CV.

However for a creative industries type job maybe that's exactly what sets you apart from the rest!
 
Also unless there is another program it's called "Sketchup" not "Skecthup"

EDIT: Also how do you have 11 and a half GCSE's ?
 
Last edited:
Get rid of the word mirroring and find another solution for your software skills because those little bar things leave much to the imagination.

Otherwise, for this industry, I think its ok.
 
I don't know if it's just me but there seems to be a double space in your "about me" section between "and" and "to" on the 2nd line.
 
I actually like the bar on the left side for dates. Word mirroring is not good though, best remove that. :)

Not a fan of the bars used to denote your abilities with applications, though it is more creative than the typical "I can do layers" etc.
 
How does it look when printed out on a cheap monochrome printer?
I suspect the light green may not fare very well.

Vertical rhythm.
It'll make your CV seem more together, more cohesive. Do some reading up on baselines and vertical rhythm.

The timeline.
While the timeline the best thing about your CV's layout, you need to ensure that information is presented consistently. Flitting between "200x" and "0x" interrupts the flow. Consider another approach to presenting divisions of years.

EDIT: Actually, the timeline isn't a timeline at all, really, is it? I'm not sure I'd suggest one continuous line if you're going to chop your timeline up to fit in with your category presentation. Maybe something as simple as dropping the last descending line within each category, or adding a terminal. That way it's presented more accurately, a "timeline within each category".

Reflected headings.
Adding my voice to the chorus: No.

Typos.
"Skecthup," as mentioned; also "A also enjoy modelling in the real world...". A few double-spaces, too.

Trebuchet
Are you sure it's the best font for something that's going to be printed? I guess it's not quite so important if you're going for architecture as opposed to graphic design, but I'm sure there are better font choices for print - Trebuchet was designed as a screen font, after all. Seeing as architecture's your thing, why not try a font like Neutraface [or the probably more usable Neutraface No.2] for example?

Formality
your call, this one, but there appear to be lots of "I am..."s when the more human "I'm..." would serve you better. Contrary to popular belief, most employers would prefer humans to robots ;)
 
Last edited:
Pretty much style over substance 'personified'.

On top of what everyone else said:

You've used 2.1 in one place at 2:1 in another place... Keep it consistent, plus just a lack of detail WRT your previous roles and personal profile. Also you sometimes start "I" and sometimes do not. Full stops missing too. All suggests lack of attention to detail.

I would not invite someone to an interview based on that CV.
 
I like the layout, except the mirrored texts, that really gave me a headache. Might want to do research, if you are applying for formal companies, that may have old fashioned work motive, an alternative (traditional) CV may suit.

On reflection I think the first page contains to little info, on my CV most of that information is covered in the top 1/3 of the first page.
 
"about me" should be a profile written in the third person.

Drop the rubbish word mirroring. Overall it also looks too flash, it's a CV not a GCSE "let's play with publisher" exercise.

Are you actually scoring yourself on ability by using some sort of videogame like bar system?"

this
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom