Visual Editors
Visual Editors, NFP was incorporated as a 501(c)(3) non-profit in 2004.
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
John Zhu
Maestro
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 275
Location: Durham, NC
Posted:
Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:17 pm
|
|
| |
| Ernie Smith wrote:: | | He's right, to a degree, but some of the things he's trashing (the cutline credit and the dateline) are perhaps a little over the top. |
Actually, I think he's more than a little over the top here. It seems like he counts every different use of a typeface a "font". For instance, the type in "VALLEY EDITION" seems to be just the same font as the date, except all caps and bolded. And anytime you change point size, he counts it as a different font. This pretty much exaggerates the "font" count exponentially. By his method, every newspaper in the country would have 20-some different "fonts" on every page, and pretty much any other type of design that has more than a couple elements would seem to have too many "fonts". While I agree with his point about limiting fonts, I don't think this page looks like a ransom note at all. The only typeface that struck me as being perhaps extraneous or out of place was the italic headline on the blogs column. I'm no big fan of the LAT's design (personal taste. I know there're people who love it), but this particular posting just came off as being a case where somebody is upset w/ their local paper about one particular thing, and therefore nothing that paper does can be good, and the paper's quality is quickly descending to hell (you know the type. We've all taken those calls before).
_________________
Let this be a lesson to you: Never Try. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Higdon
Tiki Lounger
Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 19
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posted:
Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:13 am
|
|
|
| |
I've never been a fan of the LA Times, especially the redesign, since it seems to have simply thrown some spot color on the cover and stopped dog-legging everything rather than really taking a look at where it was failing and improving upon those points. But, that's okay, they know everything.
Digression aside, you've got to look at function and clarity when it comes to these sorts of things. If it doesn't serve a purpose or make sense to the reader, there's a problem.
In this case, Cagle is not only wrong, he's damn-dead-wrong. However, he actually works in the industry and still doesn't get it. So imagine how confused readers are. We don't think they pay attention to that stuff but really they do. But instead of writing blogs, they stop buying the paper.
Prime example on the LAT cover: The difference between the standard head font and the super-condensed 1-column font. We know why they're there, but I bet you a lot of readers have always wondered "what makes this story so special that it gets this neat staggered mini-font instead of the ugly fat one in the middle?"
Second example: Multiple decks with different treatment. Why is the second deck in all caps? Or better yet, why do news stories get three decks while the column gets one 8-line nutgraf?
I know and you know the answers. But who the hell else knows? Almost certainly not your readers. People aren't as into the newspapers anymore when they used to know how the printing press worked and they wanted their big flashy lead ins. That old crap is obsolete now.
Just think about it. Is the LAT and NYT, and your own paper for that matter, built for the reader? Or is it built to be a snobby, elitist newspaper that impresses other journalists?
Why do you think the "glorified newsletters" won at SND this year? Not because they had the prettiest graphics, most color, biggest pictures, super enterprise stories or any of that bull. It's because they were tailored 100% for their audience first and looked pretty second.
Sorry, got off topic, but it's all related. Everything right down to the minimal crevice (or copyright font) needs to make sense for your reader - and that is exactly why design and newspapers are failing (well, one reason).
_________________
“Deadline is a way of life. Not an excuse.” - Annie Flanzraich, AP Reporter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Previous topic
Next topic
