Why don’t pros have portfolios?

[Griffin McPherson]

I was relistening to the 3PP episode, Building a Strong Portfolio, and Will mentioned that a great way to see what your portfolio should look like is too look at some of the pros. I looked up Dan Santat, Jon Klassen, Oliver Jeffers, Shaun Tan, as well as Lee, Will, and Jake. None of which have portfolios on their websites. How am I supposed to look at pro’s portfolios if they don’t have any?

I’m guessing they don’t have portfolios because they have so much work and proof of their capabilities with what they have published that they don’t really need a portfolio. It still feels very odd to me to not see portfolios on their sites. At what point does an illustrator no longer present a portfolio on their site?

[Asyas_illos]

@Griffin-McPherson I think any images they have on their websites counts as their portfolio at this point . So basically their website is their portfolio I think.

[Griffin McPherson]

@Asyas_illos but for the sake of looking at pros to see what we should have in our portfolios it doesn’t seem helpful when they have 50+ illustrations on their sites. If they had all of their other categories but still had a regular portfolio that would be fine but the point of a portfolio is a narrowed down selection of the best work so looking at their sites doesn’t help me gain clarity about what should be going into my portfolio.

[Asyas_illos]

@Griffin-McPherson Yah I get it, maybe check out some who aren’t quite established as the big headliners? Also maybe if you looked the agency they are represented by they have a slimmer selection? Check out bright agency they have some big names I think.

[Griffin McPherson]

@Asyas_illos ah checking out the agencies is a good idea, thanks!

[NessIllustration]

@Griffin-McPherson I'm not sure about Jake, but Will and Lee definitely have a portfolio website. It's quite large because they've accumulated a lot of very relevant high quality work, but it's still a portfolio

Personally I think that art directors might get bored at some point scrolling through a 100 images, BUT when you're as good as they are, you have the quality to keep people engaged for longer and can get away with a lot more!

A good rule is that our portfolio is only as strong as our weakest piece.

[Griffin McPherson]

@NessIllustration I guess I just wasn’t thinking of their sites as having portfolios because there’s nothing labeled as a portfolio and there’s so much work that there’s nothing that feels organized and curated like a portfolio would. I suppose what I’m looking for is a collection of 12 to 20ish pieces so to me it feels like they don’t have a portfolio. I was just hoping I could look to their sites for guidance on what a pro portfolio should look like but if I did what they did on their sites I would probably be told I have way too much work for a portfolio and I need to narrow it down.

[NessIllustration]

@Griffin-McPherson I guess it's a good example that there are any rules set in stone. There are suggestions for things that make it easier, or are GENERALLY more appealing. But in the end as long as we can pull it off, that's all that matters.

You seem to be a very organized, empirical, type A person. So this might not be the answer you're looking for and it might be very frustrating for you that there's no absolute standard and not every artist's portfolio checks all the same boxes. This personality is going to help you in most situations in the freelancing world - but it can be a double-edged sword and sometimes work against you, making you overthink things. Finding out what works for you is always going to serve you better than finding out what works for someone else.

[ArtMelC]

@Griffin-McPherson I was having the same frustration as you last month, so I changed the criteria on whose portfolio site I looked at:

a pro illustrator who is in the business for 10 -15 years ahead of me, who is represented by an agency and doesn't have too many author-illustrator books out.

I think the reason those big names no longer have a traditional portfolio is that they are now doing so much more than illustration, they may not even be "actively" looking to provide illustration services or trying to attract art directors at this time. At this point they are selling themselves as Content Creator - their website looks more like a content creator's website rather than a specific illustrator portfolio. For example, Oliver Jeffers does a whole lot more than just illustration, he does TV shows, fine arts, installations, speaking engagements... and his website reflects such. Jon Klassen is similar.

So when do you stop having a portfolio then? The answer is when it stops being useful for you in getting the work you want.

[mag]

@Griffin-McPherson At first I wasn't quite sure what you are talking about, because all these guys (except for Dan Santat - I only found his blog on Tumblr, but no portfolio website) do have portfolios...
Shaun Tan has about 8 pictures on his landing page, Oliver Jeffers about 25, Jake Parker has (in his Picture Book section, which would be something a kid lit art director would be looking for) 10 covers of his children's books.
Will Terry him self once said his website is not a good think to look at when you are searching for correct number of illustrations - his approach is more like an instagram feed, you can scroll and scroll and scroll.

But after reading the thread I think I do understand a bit what you are talking about...

I think - if you are looking for a specific number of illustrations to put in your portfolio - there's isn't one. I think 8 (as Shaun Tan has) is a bit low, Will's might be a bit too much, I would stick with about 15-25 very solid images.
When I heard that advice of looking at the pros to see how our portfolio should look like (doesn't matter if we call it "illustrations", "work", "children's books" or other terms on our website), I think rather then a specific template, you should look what all of these pros have in common. Because every illustrator's personality is different, which should shine through the website, but still there will be patterns to look for.
For me it was:

1. there are no weak pieces on their website.
2. design of the portfolio is usually minimalistic, focused on the artwork, no crazy graphics
3. the style is very clear - each illustration "belongs" with the other ones, even the color palates are similar in a way...
4. the landing page of your website definitely should have your artwork displayed.
5. be clear about what kind of work you would like to do - if you want to ilustrace picture books, have picture books illustrations in your portfolio, delete all the figural paintings, or put it into a different section of you portfolio.

some other sites you might like:
https://kurillastration.com/art
https://www.myblankpaper.com/work
https://benjidavies.squarespace.com
https://www.ishaalobo.com
https://www.davidsierra.org (he has bazillion of illustrations in his portfolio, like Will. But - all of these pieces go so well together. I think I would be careful with having a lots and lots of illustrations early in your career, mainly because there's a great chance some of them will not be so good...)

Hope it helps!
Building a portfolio is a daunting task, but you can always tweak and change it. doesn't have to be set in stone!

[Griffin McPherson]

@mag Thanks for this thorough response! I do still find a lot of these sites confusing though. Renée Kurilla’s portfolio is odd to me because every illustration is just a square. I know for certain that one of the most important things we should have in a portfolio is variation in dimensions and format like spreads, spots, and vignettes.

I love Rebecca Green’s portfolio, but the self portrait she has seems strange to me. I feel like if that were in my portfolio people would say "why do you have a self portrait in a children’s book portfolio?".

Benji Davies portfolio is just book covers like Jake’s.
I think this gets back to what @ArtMelC artmelc was saying about how artists who have lot more going on in their careers have no need for a more traditional portfolio.

@NessIllustration is right about me being a bit of a type A. I very much like to see a concrete answer but I realize the art industry does not have a lot of those. This might sound contradictory but that’s part of why I love it!
But when it’s so hard and so competitive to break in it’s easy to feel like there’s a lot more wrong choices to make than right ones so not having a concrete standard or answer can be frustrating at times.
I’d still like to know who the pros are we should be looking at like they mentioned on the podcast because if I were to follow that advice I might have a portfolio of just book covers, or one with video clips, sculptures, and posters, and that would not make for a good portfolio for someone starting out, right?

[NessIllustration]

@Griffin-McPherson You don't have to follow every advice you hear You can take inspiration from pros that are doing what you're trying to do, for instance those that work within your market and are hired by your dream clients. You can't appeal to all clients, but if you analyze what their artists are doing you might figure out what appeals to your dream clients.

[Griffin McPherson]

@NessIllustration thank you for these reminders that there’s flexibility. I can get very fixated on finding the "right" way to do things so I really appreciate it!

[Coreyartus]

@Griffin-McPherson Griffin, I've personally struggled with this contradiction since I started pondering a path toward children's illustration. The illustrators I admired did not stick to the "best practices" that so many people seemed to definitively advise. Some did, but far far more didn't. (And by "best practices" I mean a website with its own domain name and email for a specific segment of the children's illustration industry with no more than 18 images covering all manner of children's contexts and situations on a single page with a clear About/Contact info block. And nothing else.)

It seems to me that currently it's really really hard to make a living JUST as a children's illustrator. And some of the Art Directors that have spoken at my local SCBWI events have said that they don't mind seeing artists have websites that have lots of different sections and uses, because they want the artists they're working with to be successful and surviving. They know the struggle. They're not stupid. As long as menu sections are clearly labeled and they can find what they want easily and quickly they're okay with it. That's the priority: clarity of navigation. I think perhaps 15 years ago expectations may have been different, but today's ADs and Agents are much more web-savvy than they used to be.

You have to look at who is giving you the original advice. Did they experience the same path you're experiencing? Is it people who have the privilege of only working in one industry (which, to be honest, is getting more and more rare)? Is it well-meaning people repeating what they think is expertise because that's what they've heard? Is it pros who have moved beyond the children's illustration field after already achieving success in it?

I will admit it makes me incredibly frustrated (and sometimes even kind of angry) to hear so many people emphatically say that things need to be one definitive way but then turn around and see clearly and evidently with my own eyes complete contradictions to their wisdom by very successful professionals I admire. Even Illustration Agencies don't follow the "rules"--they sometimes have 30-50 images of the same artists's work in very different styles, and even have the same pieces listed under completely different industry categories even though they are seemingly contradictory--like children's illustration in commercial art and vice versa. It's exasperating.

In the end, you have to make the choices that you think will be best for your path and your situation and your capacity to have a career. Yes, consider what their needs are. But in the end, it's your website, not theirs. If it helps, make a specific website for only that particular potential income stream, and make sure you share it with people in that industry who need to know about it. It's a simple matter to make one nowadays. Put a clear link to it on your own more inclusive and generalized website just in case.

[NessIllustration]

@Coreyartus I think a lot of the "best practices", which I teach myself, are not the only way to succeed but rather make it easier to find success. Since illustration is hard as it is, we don't have to turn on hard mode on top of that!

I'm not sure if the pros who aren't following the "rules" became successful in spite of it, or have only begun doing what they want after they became successful because they can now get away with it... I don't have the answer to that, but it's interesting to ponder!

I also think that this field has become increasingly competitive. Just in the last few years, agencies went from receiving a few dozen submissions every month to a few thousands now. The selection criteria has shot up very quickly. Someone who was accepted in an agency even just 3-5 years ago could easily be passed over now. So pros who have started their careers before that do have an advantage and got away with more! That includes me - I was easily signed by 2 agents at the beginning of my career, but now I'm honestly not sure I could score one anymore.

[Griffin McPherson]

@NessIllustration I think this could make for a good 3pp episode, what rules do beginners need to follow that pros get to break?

[kayleenartlover]

My question is how many "best work" should be in your portfolio?

1. I've heard 3PP tell one person to do 3 projects, several pages of 2 books in your style and several pages of one of your own story ideas with original characters.
2. I've also read through Will Terry's 100 list and even if you combine stuff, that's still easily over 20 illustrations.
3. Then there's the list of types of illustrations: spot, vignette, one page, and two page (leaving room for potential text to go on top of the illustration).
4. I even asked Anthony Wheeler in one of his twitch streams, and he said art directors or agents will know what to do with you by just seeing 6 two-page spreads of your work. And that you don't need 10, 15, 20, or however many pieces you think you need. That means not even book cover examples?!

[NessIllustration]

@kayleenartlover You can put 50 if you want, but the art directors don't need to see that much, and it's risky because in 50 there's bound to be some pieces that are not quite as good. Maybe the anatomy is slightly wonky, maybe the contrast just isn't popping, or maybe there's no storytelling at all so the piece is kind of bland and doesn't achieve much. Those pieces hurt you more than they help. That's why the general advice is to limit your selection more than you maybe even think you need, to force you to eliminate weaker pieces. However if you truly have 50 excellent pieces that have no weaknesses, I don't think it'll hurt you to show them all.

[Griffin McPherson]

@kayleenartlover
The 12 to 20 range is always what I’ve heard for how many pieces to have. If you have way more than that that you would consider your best pieces I would say narrow it down to the ones that best reflect that type of work you would like to do.

Will’s list is what I’ve been using to guide my portfolio but I feel really disinterested in drawing a lot of the things on that list, they’re simply not the sorts of things that I would draw and when I look to my favorite children’s book illustrators they don’t draw those things either.
Like you said it would probably amount to about 20 pieces if you were to include all of those things in a portfolio and I don’t think I’ve ever seen a portfolio that includes even a quarter of what is on that list.
I think the way I’m going to go about using it now is more so as a guideline than a checklist.

[Nyrryl Cadiz]

@Griffin-McPherson rules don't apply to you if you're famous I guess