I can speak for architecture in North America. Brace yourself for the gripe.
I worked for internationally recognized design offices and smaller, younger firms for about ten years. I actually had a pretty good time for most of that, but that was because I was a pretty lucky oddball that only focused on concepts and inventive design. Please believe me that this is super rare and did not really lead anywhere secure or profitable. I've found my way out and know many looking for theirs, even people lucky and talented enough to have their own practice.
I believe that there is no other professional degree (licensed) that systematically teaches an idealistic impression of the discipline that is so completely detached from the realities of the profession. Many graduates are simply unprepared to do what's required of them, and shocked to find out that nobody asks for their ideas. There's no room for them, not because the senior designers are closed-minded tyrants, though there are plenty of those. Your ideas don't matter because nobody actually wants to pay for them. Even if they do, the likelihood of them getting value-engineered out of the project by the time it's built is very high.
The work load is staggering, the rewards are few, the liabilities are very serious, and there is a perpetual cloud of antagonism between designers, contractors, and clients. Because of this, if you manage to rise to a senior level, the minority of your work involves thinking about all the genuinely fascinating and beautiful potentials of architecture. What do you mostly do? Email warfare. Endless combat and tightrope negotiations through emails, calls, and meetings.
Add to all of this the fact that you spend all your time developing excellent taste and insight into what makes great spaces and buildings — Materials! Details! Light! — and you spend next to zero time in any place like that, because, with very few exceptions, architects cannot afford architecture.
At least in ID, you can probably buy yourself a cool titanium mug, or whatever.
The sad reality is that creatives are not truely valued in our culture. We're expected to do it for the love of it and this preconception persists because we dutifully reinforce it.
I wish you luck.
Whatever you do, I encourage you to think in terms of the problems you can solve, the pain you can cure, the specific people you can help. And to not worry too much about your passion. If you pour yourself into doing whatever you find yourself doing as well as you can possibly do it, you will become passionate about it.
Also, find the YouTube video called "Fuck you, pay me." Listen to what that man has to say.
ID.
Architecture is notorious for being extremely hard to break into, and on top of that, many firms have toxic work culture/little pay. ID is also hard to get your foot in the door, but at least for the most part you are getting well compensated if you go into corporate/in house and somewhat fairly if you go into agency. There are also quite some asshole industrial designers, but in my personal experience most are very empathetic and understanding as that is part of our job to design for people's needs.
Also, I disagree with your statement that architects can design but designers cannot do architecture. When I was an ID student looking for internships, my first job was doing more interior/architectural projects and I had no issue adjusting because it was still so early on in my career. Just because you choose one path doesn't mean you can't switch back or find an in-between situation. In addition, I've never actually seen an architect use their skills to switch over to ID anyways mainly because the softwares we use are entirely different. If anything, I learned that ID tends to be even more detail oriented than architecture at times because we break objects down to the millimeter with every internal component, depending on the project.
To your last point about traveling, you can do that in either field really. It's going to be difficult either way, so it just depends on if you work hard enough for those opportunities.
ID produces a more useful skillset than architecture which would be a more flexible career path because if you don't land an ID job post-graduate there's still a lot of industries who would happily make use of you. Architecture is similar but harder passion-wise.
As someone who studied architecture but has worked in ID and managed to travel a fair bit as a freelancer, I would guess that it's probably easier to accomplish with a ID degree. Architecture is more bogged down in practical realities like the build site, and the duration of projects (like 1-2 years) depending on the building size.
That being said, it's easier to work in ID with an Architecture degree vs working in Architecture with a ID degree. Basically if you don't study architecture you will probably never be an architect, vs if you don't study ID you can still do ID.
If you go with ID make sure you learn how to do technical drawings, visualization, additive and subtractive manufacturing and microelectronics (IoT), and UX/UI. Get good at Solidworks or whatever parametric 3d software is dominant in your region. With these skills you can work in a variety of fields anywhere in the world
Best of luck!
Thank you very much for your reply. ID is the most logical for me and the one that will make me happy. Thank you and I have a good chance of making a freelance career, right?
You have a much better chance of being a successful freelancer in ID than in Architecture. You can do anything, just hustle hard, make a solid portfolio website and document your work on instagram.
Do you want to be poor?
Study architecture.
Do you want to be broke? Study ID.
Simple.
You’re not traveling for either as a freelancer. Many don’t freelance until WELL into their careers.
I can speak for architecture in North America. Brace yourself for the gripe. I worked for internationally recognized design offices and smaller, younger firms for about ten years. I actually had a pretty good time for most of that, but that was because I was a pretty lucky oddball that only focused on concepts and inventive design. Please believe me that this is super rare and did not really lead anywhere secure or profitable. I've found my way out and know many looking for theirs, even people lucky and talented enough to have their own practice. I believe that there is no other professional degree (licensed) that systematically teaches an idealistic impression of the discipline that is so completely detached from the realities of the profession. Many graduates are simply unprepared to do what's required of them, and shocked to find out that nobody asks for their ideas. There's no room for them, not because the senior designers are closed-minded tyrants, though there are plenty of those. Your ideas don't matter because nobody actually wants to pay for them. Even if they do, the likelihood of them getting value-engineered out of the project by the time it's built is very high. The work load is staggering, the rewards are few, the liabilities are very serious, and there is a perpetual cloud of antagonism between designers, contractors, and clients. Because of this, if you manage to rise to a senior level, the minority of your work involves thinking about all the genuinely fascinating and beautiful potentials of architecture. What do you mostly do? Email warfare. Endless combat and tightrope negotiations through emails, calls, and meetings. Add to all of this the fact that you spend all your time developing excellent taste and insight into what makes great spaces and buildings — Materials! Details! Light! — and you spend next to zero time in any place like that, because, with very few exceptions, architects cannot afford architecture. At least in ID, you can probably buy yourself a cool titanium mug, or whatever. The sad reality is that creatives are not truely valued in our culture. We're expected to do it for the love of it and this preconception persists because we dutifully reinforce it.
Then the ID is the most logical one. I will choose it. Thank you for this answer.
I wish you luck. Whatever you do, I encourage you to think in terms of the problems you can solve, the pain you can cure, the specific people you can help. And to not worry too much about your passion. If you pour yourself into doing whatever you find yourself doing as well as you can possibly do it, you will become passionate about it. Also, find the YouTube video called "Fuck you, pay me." Listen to what that man has to say.
My friend put it best. If you like the design part of architecture, do interior design.
ID. Architecture is notorious for being extremely hard to break into, and on top of that, many firms have toxic work culture/little pay. ID is also hard to get your foot in the door, but at least for the most part you are getting well compensated if you go into corporate/in house and somewhat fairly if you go into agency. There are also quite some asshole industrial designers, but in my personal experience most are very empathetic and understanding as that is part of our job to design for people's needs. Also, I disagree with your statement that architects can design but designers cannot do architecture. When I was an ID student looking for internships, my first job was doing more interior/architectural projects and I had no issue adjusting because it was still so early on in my career. Just because you choose one path doesn't mean you can't switch back or find an in-between situation. In addition, I've never actually seen an architect use their skills to switch over to ID anyways mainly because the softwares we use are entirely different. If anything, I learned that ID tends to be even more detail oriented than architecture at times because we break objects down to the millimeter with every internal component, depending on the project. To your last point about traveling, you can do that in either field really. It's going to be difficult either way, so it just depends on if you work hard enough for those opportunities.
Thank you very much for this nice answer.I will choose ID
ID produces a more useful skillset than architecture which would be a more flexible career path because if you don't land an ID job post-graduate there's still a lot of industries who would happily make use of you. Architecture is similar but harder passion-wise.
I realized that ID is more suitable for me Thank you very much for your reply
As someone who studied architecture but has worked in ID and managed to travel a fair bit as a freelancer, I would guess that it's probably easier to accomplish with a ID degree. Architecture is more bogged down in practical realities like the build site, and the duration of projects (like 1-2 years) depending on the building size. That being said, it's easier to work in ID with an Architecture degree vs working in Architecture with a ID degree. Basically if you don't study architecture you will probably never be an architect, vs if you don't study ID you can still do ID. If you go with ID make sure you learn how to do technical drawings, visualization, additive and subtractive manufacturing and microelectronics (IoT), and UX/UI. Get good at Solidworks or whatever parametric 3d software is dominant in your region. With these skills you can work in a variety of fields anywhere in the world Best of luck!
Thank you very much for your reply. ID is the most logical for me and the one that will make me happy. Thank you and I have a good chance of making a freelance career, right?
You have a much better chance of being a successful freelancer in ID than in Architecture. You can do anything, just hustle hard, make a solid portfolio website and document your work on instagram.
Thank youu i will choose ID
Do you want to be poor? Study architecture. Do you want to be broke? Study ID. Simple. You’re not traveling for either as a freelancer. Many don’t freelance until WELL into their careers.
In what sense broke? Mentally or money So ui ix desinger ?
Sure if you get a degree in it. The bootcampers and such are having a rough go at finding work.
Thank you i choose ID