Design thread

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

I can't get past the color screens to decide what can be done to save the pages.

There's simply TOO much going on and I get all confused. I like the look at the top of the page, but does stuff like that really belong in a newspaper. It works in magazines, but I don't know that that sort of thing works in a newspaper.

But I really can't get past the color. There's way too much of it, and for no apparent reason.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

i guess i'm the only one who likes 'em -- well, me and the 8-13 percent more people who are buying single copies and the advertisers -- but the only one here

i like 'em because they're different and they really kinda grab me, which is something we need to do... i really like this one:




and i think this:



is really great. it focuses on one thing -- one thing people are asking -- and looks at it.

all these pages grab me. hell, dyepak says that's not what readers want, they want good, intelligent headlines and good, deep stories. is that what readers want or is that what dye and the rest of us who take news seriously want? people read usa today for a reason, and it's certainly not for its quality. people like pretty pictures and bright colors.

and, well, i like bakerfield's pretty pictures and bright colors. guess i'm just a simpleton (beating others to the punch)

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

Those two appear to be samples rather than real McCoys, though. I can sort of squint and see dates in the future.

Which brings me to my next point, sure to be attacked by one and all:

Do we seriously think we can look at pages reduced to the size of a dollar bill and say: "Yep. Uh-huh. That's what readers want?"

Because that sounds awfully ignorant to me.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

But, DPack, thing is that the Californian asked readers what they want, content-wise and design-wise. part of it was better content (better in the sense of more what they said they want) with headlines that draw them in. Some was what we got here. Readers told them they like color. They got color. Now, I truly think they've went a little overboard, but hey, they gave the readers color.

And sportschick, I'd argue that some of the best design in newspapers looks like magazines. Look at some of the stuff the Plain-Dealer does. Look at some of the packages you see other places. Heck, one of my favorite packages that I did recently looked like a magazine spread. True, some magazine stuff doesn't translate to newsprint. But some does. And some of the best design out there is in magazines.

And spnited, you're right to say we need to ask what we can do better, but doesn't that also say that we think there's NOTHING that we could do different that we're not already doing. You're statement implies we shouldn't innovate or add to what we do, just fine-tune it.

Again, I don't love these pages. A lot about them bothers me. But I think as designers we need to do a lot of searching to find out what we need to do to bring readers what they want. And sure surveys show they all want something different. So we need to find out what we can give well, what we can't give well, what the interest is out there for and how we can give it best. Sure, it ain't easy. But I think to say it's not important is to say, Hey, let's just stick with how we're doing things and not worry about declining readership and circulation numbers. It hasn't hit me.

Thing is, that last sentence should always end with the word "Yet."

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

I know some of the best design is in mags right now. I just think there was too much here, but I will admit that I prefer very clean pages without a lot of stuff going on.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

And a-one, and a-two, and a ...

You can take a page
Make it like a dollar bill

(Yes you can; yes you can)

And you can find a sage
To be the designers' shill

(Nod your heads, up and down)

And then we write
About the moving eye

(Left to right, up and down)

Then say we're right
And ignore the lie

(No, it's true; no, it's true)

And you've found the Magic Store!

Second verse ...

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

By happy coincidence, the Wall Street Journal had a front-page article today on all the wacky things that newspapers are doing to kick-start the business model. Bakersfield is discussed quite a bit, although not for the design. Seems they're trying lots of different things out in Dwight Yokum country.

http://online.wSportsJournalists.co...4HK24wvi8LI0J3pEraaGc_20060329.html?mod=blogs

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

I've been looking over the sports pages in the Bakersfield redesign for a few weeks because the word around our campfire is that our paper is looking to bring Jacobson (sic?) in to work on our paper. He has already redesinged our website, which some people love and others hate. I heard what he did the best was make everyone mad (I think the term he used to describe the people here was morons). But hey, I like the way those pages look. Hell, I like the color screens behind the stories, it draws the eye to that copy. It also breaks up chunks of text in differnet stories without the need to use pictures.
But what do I know. ;D

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

I like this post. It refers to the design camp, uses the word morons, and refers to the eye moving left and right, up and down, as if it's on the level of quantum physics.

Magnifico!

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

If the president were ever to be assassinated, or the San Andreas Fault do its damage, I would love to see how the purveyors of high-tech wacky at Bakersfield would handle that. Would the readers appreciate the color hemorrhage then? My question is, will the increase in circulation (and I would like the full story of how that came about; it doubt it's all or mostly about the design) make up for the added expenditure in color ink and the expenditure on extra designers to keep the consistency thing going?

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

DPack, I know you've likely been asked this before, but what should a newspaper look like? Should we go back to the days of old with no art, stories just crammed together on the front, nothing to draw a reader to the story?
While I understand that design MUST be content driven, I also understand that the average reader is not going to sit down and read the entire paper cover to cover. Hell, I'm the knid of reader that skims newspapers and if something catches my eye, I'll actually read it. Nine times out of ten, if something doesn't have some sort of art, graphic or the like attached, I'll pass it over. That's what the color screens behind the copy did for me, drew me into the story.
Drawing the eye is not on the level with quantum physics, but neither is headline writing or writing at all. We are not scientists here, people. We are just people with the gift of putting things together in an interesting way, or writers with a nack for telling a stroy.
As for the morons comment, I shouldn't defend Jacobson, he made a lot of people mad. This is not the way I feel about things. We are having troubles with the switch to InDesign now and I am the first to help those that have problems.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 3/22*

There's a lot of room between having 12 stories on the front and having design camps that obsess over pages reduced to the size of dollar bills.

I, too, would like to know the real story behind the circulation increase.

And I am calling bullshit on the claim that 1,000 more inches of classified ads are sold in connection with the redesign alone. I guarantee there's more to that story.