Design thread

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

Chris: Good catch on the tie on Jerry West. I didn't even notice that. Very clever. I have no problem with a fact box on the Baltimore centerpiece, but it may have cluttered it up. It looks like they were trying to go for a clean, sharp front with the look.

Shotglass (which by the way, I'm about to heavily use one of your namesake): I completely agree. I'm all for teaser boxes, but that one just looks horrible.

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

nice touch on the nba logo by kc

that's great shit. maybe we're the only people who appreciate shit like that, but it's nice to see it sometimes

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

Eh, I don't mind it. I think it takes some getting used to because it's, well, a bit different.

That said ...  it's basically just a rail that can grow/shrink to fit your needs.
Which I like a lot better than the traditional "must run all the way down the page regardless of whether or not we have anything to fill it with" rail...

My one nitpick: It's probably a bit wider than it really needs to be -- I'd prefer it to be closer to 1 on a 6, more in line with their A1 'L'. But other than that I think it's ok....

Here's my question: What is it, specifically, that you guys don't like about it?

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

That width ... that high.

It's making the reefers a more integral component of the top half of the page than reefers ever should be, to my thinking. (Count me among those who believe newspaper executives are screwing themselves into the ground with reefers ... expect to soon see reefers to other reefers.)

I agree that I wouldn't have nearly the problem with it if it were 1 on 6. But it's too bulky in that position.

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

Glad to see I wasn't the only one really weirded out by the basketball-head guy.

As for the refer package on the Sun front. I'm having a really hard time "liking" it because of the all caps headline right next to it. It just seems like SOOO much is competing to get my attention that I don't really know where to go, except straight to the centerpiece, which really defeats the purpose to the L rail/refers.

And a few questions that Rukan might have the answer to -- is that the standard width of the expandable rail? And does it usually run with a screen behind it?

I think I would like it if it was a little narrower and deeper, maybe all the way down to the fold.

But again, that's just me.

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

The width of the Baltimore rail on the above page appears to be an anomaly. It's usually (or at least often) the width of a standard (1-on-6) column. And, I'd agree, it does look too bulky at the wider measure.

I gotta say, I'm a fan of it, in principle. It's the utility of a rail without eating up 1/6 of your page. The beauty of it is that it's expandable or collapsable depending on how much needs to go in it or around it. That's tons better, in my opinion, than locking in a rail the length of the page and then having to pad it out some days.

The "L" shape appears to be a Lucie Lacava signature now. It was introduced in her redesign of La Presse in Montreal a couple years back. And she was the consultant in Baltimore.

As for whether the Baltimore or St. Louis redesign is better, I'm shocked that question has actually been posed. Baltimore still looks like a serious newspaper (with, sure, a lot more color). St. Louis... I'm not even sure what St. Louis looks like. But "good" or "newsy" aren't words that springs to mind.

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

And: Were you saying the rest of the Sun page is a wreck? How so? To me, it's one of the more clearly balanced/organized pages I've seen on this thread.

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

For the simplistic answer, tball, the Sun's better than what it was when it was doglegging its stories. It still isn't one of the better-looking sections out there.

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

I hate stacking six column packages on top of each other...It looks so...flat...someone please pass the syrup.

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

If I remember correctly, the St. Louis redesign was done completely in-house, right? I can't help but think it could have turned out better if they had a little more guidance in the the project.

As for the Baltimore redesign, when I saw the prototypes, I immediately liked it (well, sans cheesy column sigs). I also think the color flag adds a nice punch.

I'm at a place with a "static" rail, and I can't even begin to count how many times we have to just put stuff in the rail to fill it out, things that don't really warrant being promo'd to off the cover. I think the "flexible" rail is great for that. With the screen on it, I also think it can provide a nice frame for the top of the page. This might be a better example of the L-rail:


Also, about Baltimore, editor Tim Franklin launched the same concept he had when he was editor of the Orlando Sentinel when the Sun launched this redesign - a weekly high school tab called "Varsity".

You can see more about "Varsity" and the redesign here: http://www.baltimoresun.com/about/bal-redesign,0,3096010.htmlstory

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

Jeff Glick -- then of the Sun-Sentinel, now of the Tennessean -- consulted on the Post-Dispatch's redesign.

And the page above is a better example of the "L" ... it doesn't need to stretch all the way down the page, so you can put another story underneath it. A much more efficient use of their space....

 

Re: Design thread *updated 11/3*

Ahhh, OK.

Thanks Rukan.