Home > Teaching Tools > Cyber Dialogue
Teaching Tools Cyber Dialogue: Five Burning Design Questions J-Ideas begins a new feature -- The Cyber Dialogue. In this edition, director Warren Watson works with a panel of five professional experts to probe a series of basic questions about layout and design..
Rules? Boxes? Screens? Morticing type? What works and what doesn’t? We asked some designers, teachers and consultants to sort out some myths and misconceptions about basic design.
Our virtual panelists from newspapers and organizations all around North America:
---Dan Ryan, design director, Lawrence (Mass.) Eagle-Tribune
---Pegie Stark, design consultant, University of South Florida
---Rolf Rehe, design consultant, columnist, SND’s Design Magazine
---Steve Dorsey, assistant managing editor for design, Detroit Free Press
---Gayle Grin, assistant managing editor for design, National Post, Toronto
---Phil Nesbitt, Adjunct and design consultant, American Press InstituteWATSON: What are the specific traits of the best-designed professional newspapers – large and small?
DORSEY: Consistency, discipline, boldness, willingness to take informed risks, sophistication: The best papers don’t assume their readers are idiots who need everything spelled out to the n-th degree. Also, awareness and control of details. Neatness DOES count.
GRIN: Consistency, yes. Also, a good underlying grid and limited typefaces.
RYAN: The best designs put an emphasis on information and ideas, rather than simple decoration. That's what makes papers like San Jose and, these days, Columbus, so good. Good editors don't tell designers to "dress this up." They're all about visual story-telling. Technical skills are a means to an end, not an end in themselves. The music isn't in the piano, as they say
NESBITT: The good papers have a strong organization and clear structure allowing the readers to know where they are and to navigate the product easily. The bad ones don't. The good ones use type well, there is a clear heirarchy and they aren't all over the board. The bad ones either use poor choices in type or they use every font in the type library.
1) WATSON: How is design related to readership?
STARK : Each design decisions must reflect the spirit, the
mood and meaning of the story or stories being displayed. The design should reflect the philosophy of the content of the paper. The philosophy of a paper reflects the audience it serves. Then, the design reflects the content.
RYAN: There's a lot of information out there, and people don't have a lot of time
to sift through it. Good design serves readers by presenting well edited information clearly. Also, we're competing in a visually savvy world, and a slap-dash look can hurt credibility.
GRIN: Design helps readers navigate the stories. Design should be created to reflect the readership. Is the audience upscale, high end? Are the readers non-readers, subway readers? The design needs to meet that.
DORSEY: Design is about HOW we tell the stories and HOW we package the photos and other information in a paper. HOW you read a paper depends directly on how much the papers’ staff knows it’s readers and prepared the product with them in mind. Design IS packaging too. Let’s not forget that or be ashamed of it. Packaging is directly related to how someone interacts with a product. If you have clear, thoughtful and useful design, that positively benefits a customer’s experience. But it’s sort of like the conga drums in a Tarzan movie – they shouldn’t perceive good design all on it’s own, they should just be able to enjoy the jungle (the news). It’s when the drums suddenly fall silent (when design is not working) that it becomes apparent.
NESBITT: Half the battle is to get the reader to stop on the page. Most often this is achieved through good design - not always, a strong headline will do the trick. If the reader doesn't stop on a page, they won't read. If they do stop, the chances are certainly higher that they will at least browse the page and perhaps read something that they otherwise wouldn't. Good design brings the readers into a product, then into a page, bad design doesn't.
2) WATSON: What about rules and boxes? Good? Bad? Why?
NESBITT: Rules can be very effective when used properly. A box or rule should do only one of two things, isolate elements on a page or organize elements on a page. They need not be thicker than 1 point (often 0.5 point will be more than adequate). Any rule of 2 points or thicker becomes a graphic element.
GRIN: Some division of stories is necessary, could be white space as is done in the Boston Globe or fine rules. Rules should receed, not call attention to themselves.
RYAN: Let’s talk about rules of another kind – that is, the kind of rules that govern what we do in design. Rules are definitely needed. Rules provide standards. They help readers, who pick up on visual cues more readily than many give them credit for. Well-written rules (or guidelines) aren't stifling; they articulate objectives and limits so designers can generate and execute ideas and take risks where appropriate.
REHE: Neither good nor bad; it depends if they serve a purpose. To me, they are an organizing tool and one that helps to show what elements belong together, i.e., which photo goes with which text.
3) WATSON: What about color screens (and gray screens)? Good? Bad? Why?
GRIN: Color screens work if they are pale and reproduction is good....but again a limited color palette is necessary or they begin to be look messy. I would avoid gray screens, they can become muddy even with good reproduction.
RYAN: I'm not a fan of color and tinted screens. I believe you save your color for content: Photos and graphics are much more effective when they don't have to fight what I call structural or standing color.
NESBITT: Screens should be used sparingly. Know your press. Screens often reproduce heavier than we intend. That being said, they can be effective in highlighting specific information, call attention to sidebars and for use in nugget (glance) boxes
REHE: The reduce the legibility of text type. But they can serve a purpose; use them sparingly and make the type slightly heavier (i.e., medium) and slightly larger to compensate for the reduced legibility caused by the non-white background.
4) WATSON: Are there situations where type inside photos (morticing) works?
NESBITT: There are few, very few instances where type inside a photo works.
STARK: If the content calls for it, why not – as long as the photographer is involved in the discussion. Don’t do it every day. Don’t do it on every section front.
RYAN: Sure, type in photos can work, with limits. Our stylebook distinguishes
between documentary photos and illustrative photos. No type is allowed over
documentary photos (same with cutouts/silos). We define documentary photos
(simply, photos that portray an event - - even Sports!) and then give other
guidelines (don't damage the basic content of the photo; make sure the type
is legible). Even then, judgment calls are sometimes necessary.
5) WATSON: Any final thoughts? Why should I worry about design: I’m too busy getting out the paper!
RYAN: If you're that busy getting the paper out, you'll want people to at least
pick it up, possibly even read it. Design isn't just flower-arranging. It's
storytelling, too, and be it simple or complex, design is a part of the
package.
GRIN: Why should I care about design? Consistent well-maintained design is easy and time saving. A consistent-looking paper is easy for the reader to navigate.
NESBITT: If we don't pay attention to design and structure, our readers will migrate to a growing list of other media delivery vehicles to get their information. Potential readers won't even start.
|
