The Pioneer Press of St. Paul, Minn., unveiled a fresh, new look today, redesigned for a narrower web width.
Sorry; I had to stretch to find an “after” for your before-and-after peek:
Here’s a closer look at Tuesday’s front. As always, please click on the thumbnail:
Pioneer Press editor Thom Fladung writes on today’s A1:
The Pioneer Press we printed today is different in a couple of ways. And, depending on the edition you got, it may be changing further in the next few days. Some explanation:
– The paper is narrower. You’re not imagining it. We’ve changed to a page width that is becoming the newspaper industry standard, allowing us to use less paper.
– Some of you may have a paper that’s the same width as before, but with narrower stories. We had to make this conversion one printing press at a time. So, some people today will get newspapers on the old, wider paper. By Wednesday, we expect all papers to be in the new size.
– The paper looks different. Along with reducing its width, we took the opportunity to improve the look of the Pioneer Press and make it easier to use. So, for example, each section is now color-coded.
Wow. Having to phase in a width change. I’ll bet that’s a headache!
Fladung goes on to mention things like anchoring briefs and enlarging the crossword.
He stresses that the Pioneer Press did not change the size of its text, nor did it shrink its newshole, reduce the TV listings or move any popular features.
It looks like a completely new set of headline fonts, though. We’ll see if we can dig up more info for you.
Read all about it in today’s Pioneer Press.
Best headline for a lead story on a freshly redesigned paper … ever.
• I’d like to see more different types of info graphics. Would a map still have the rule on the left side? Just curious.
• Not sure about having a rule and a shaded box behind graphics, lists, stat boxes, etc. Having both elements looks cluttered. Judging only on the graphics in today’s paper; the headlines don’t pop out enough to me.
• Our copy must have been one of the first printed. The press colors were off. The colors looked terrible, until I saw it online. I only had the 1A pages to compare.
• I think the leading in the text could be spaced a little more. Stories seemed a little crowded. I know one of the challenges was to keep the type the same size. Maybe reporters have to write less to achieve a little more air.
• At first glance I thought that the section covers were inside pages because the section head doesn’t stand out very much.
• I like that there’s a lot of consistency with the font styles throughout the paper except, on 1B the CP has a font that is only used one in the Biz section and it looks like it doesn’t belong.
• I’m sorry to say this (no offense)…the new “futuristic” looking font reminds me a lot of a weekly publication or the Star Trib. But I’m a buff for the classic look and also a young, woman reader.
• The crossword puzzle is too big for my taste. I don’t like that it goes over the fold. If a puzzle was going to grow in size, make the Sudoku bigger. Avid Sudoku solvers like to make pencil marks in the boxes. If they’re too small it’s hard to do that.
• I love a smaller paper. I get coffee and breakfast at a local “greasy spoon” where the tables are tiny. Having a smaller paper gives me a free hand to sip java while I read.
• I feel like I need more time to soak in the change. To be brutally honest I don’t really like the new redesign. In fairness I didn’t like the Star Tribune’s either. There’s too much going on for me on the pages and it takes away from the content. I can’t see a harmony with all the different fonts. Maybe I’m just a fan of the K.I.S.S. method…
What a disappointment that ‘new & improved larger crossword’ now extends over the fold? Who would ever be able to do the crossword with the paper in full extention. I am either in the car waiting for a kid, or sitting at the kitchen counter drinking my coffee. The constant flipping to see and reveiw those below the fold clues was annoying. The rest of the changes are fine… Just fix the crossword!
I’m sure the editors and publishers think the changes will save them money. However, I can’t help but think the “USA Today” look is not going to go over well.
The headline fonts are Verlag from H&FJ, which takes its flavor from Dwiggins’ Metro and expands on it. The slab serif is Dispatch from (I believe) Font Bureau. It looks like the SF Chronicle about 10 years ago before Nan got her hands on it. In today’s front page on Newseum, they used Mercury Display as a headline typeface too.
The new design? Well, frankly it looks old. Reminds me of fonts I used 20+ years ago working on the college rag. Speaking of fonts, there are just too many. Looks like a bad imitation of USA today. do I mind the narrower page. Heck no. Save a tree for heaven’s sake.
I liked the “old” look much better. Why change a really good thing? I thought the new look was a mistake and honestly almost tossed it because I thought it was the suburban newspaper I get once a week (gasp!). That should tell you something about how horrid it looks.
Alas. . . there are probably not many readers who will even notice. Just us old graphics designers that know a good font from a really bad one.
May have to switch to the Trib after all.
Charles, et al.:
I wanted to amend an earlier statement about Verlag. I was abrupt to suggest that Verlag is a knockoff. Surely it pays homage to Dwiggins and others, but the geometrics of Verlag are much cleaner than Metro, and the Metro Condensed used by the Chronicle before it moved to Akzidenz-Grotesk. Regardless if what I or others may think, Verlag is a truly universal and strong typeface that will have lasting power at the PiPress.