Design thread

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

I think the page is extremely effective in this: there's no doubt in what it's "selling", which is a kick-ass Joe Pa story right before their BCS bowl.

I think the biggest problem I see in designs (much more often on 1A) is that you have three of four great things you're trying to "sell" and you feel like you have to get a mug with this, a graphic with that a special art head with that. The result is the page becomes more muddied with every treatment you try on your secondary stories. My question always is: What are you selling today and how can you put every possible resource into selling it effectively? I will always praise a page or a paper that has figured that out, because I see far too many examples of the other side of that spectrum (it usually involves someone saying, "well, we don't really have a strong lead story" OR "we have THREE HUGE STORIES on the cover tomorrow") If we can't decide what's most important, then how can readers.

I don't think the rest of the page is sacrificed at all, it's just clearly secondary to the centerpiece. The typography on the top left story does seem a little much...

I agree with Shotglass after reading the story that they should have played up the details of the 2004 failed coup.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*


I'm as guilty as anyone concerning rob's complaint.

On a front page I just get the heebie-jeebies if I don't have SOMETHING to attract a reader to a story, whether it's a mug or a chart or a "today's game: xxxx vs. xxxxx, 8 p.m., TNT" sig.

It's hard to leave a pure rectangle of type alone. But sometimes we should.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

rob, BT, I'm afraid we're in different schools on that one.

When I was doing 4-5 story fronts, it was my goal to make every story deemed good enough for the section front look like something worth reading. I HATED front-page stories with no augmentation ... an info box, a mug, something.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

I'm with Rob on this one; the CP story should have plenty of oomph, and throwing mug shots for mug shots' sake on the smaller stuff only diminishes your main stoy. And a very vertical page does tend to break your secondary items into one-column stories, but that doesn't automatically mean you're shortchanging those items.

I think you take it on a case-by-case, day-by-day basis -- in this case, the P-G no doubt wanted to give JoePa plenty of real estate, partly because the other cover stories (W.V., Penguins, Pitt feature) didn't deserve all much play in their minds. I'm sure it was discussed and considered carefully ... right?  ;D 

So I guess I'm saying: I like the fairly dominant play on the CP (a pretty strong, well-designed CP), but I also would like to think its' not design for design's sake.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

I used to be same way as you, Shotglass. And there are still plenty of times when all the stories on our covers have something visual for it. But it was the excess and the bad examples of trying to do "something" for 4-5 stories on a page that has made me come around to what I originally said.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

I think I'm going to have to side with Rob on this one.

Too many pages I see these days have far too much clutter on them, logos, mug shots, pull-out boxes that really don't need to be there. I think designers need to edit their work more. Does this pull out have to go on the front, or can it run with the jump? Do we really need to run a mug shot of Kobe Bryant with this story, or does everyone by now know what he looks like? It's about story telling. If something helps tell the story better, I'm all about those things being out there. But if it's just there for eye candy because you think that part of the page is too gray, then don't run it.

My question to you is why do you feel you needed to add something to it? Can't a good headline alone get you to read the story? I used to feel the same way you did, but the longer I work as a designer, the less I agree with that way of thinking.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

Believe me, Brian, if I thought a great head was enough, that's the route I'd go more often.

But I'm finding that just some little thing -- a TV box, a mug (and really, how often is a mug NOT for the sake of art?) -- gives an element life.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

I detest mug shots on the cover, unless it's a string of four or five or an idea like that.
If you need a mug, you need a small photo. And that gives you a cutline, which are some the most-read things in the paper.

I must say, considering how the Pittsburgh paper has been designed in the past (headlines that come up way short of the space, etc.), Ben Howard's work there is tremendous and very cool.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*


Mugs do have a place.

If we have a headline that says "Marlins to sign Rodriguez" a mug will tell the reader at a glance that it is Pudge and not A-Rod.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

Nah, all them Rodriguezeseseses look alike.... 8)

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

Sometimes a story doesn't have built-in art, and sometimes you just don't have room to get that small photo and cutline in without cutting so much text that you only have a few grafs before the jump. Not good.

And mugs are useful to break up solid blocks of grey text, which are also not good.

 

Re: Design thread *Updated 12/30*

Absolutely, the man does fine work.