Beyond Typography

Design: from print to web

There's been a lot of stuff being posted about the future of magazines, newspapers, journalists, in fact anything to do with print. Karl Schneider, Editorial Director at RBI, had makes some good points on his  blog about the future role of the production desk.

Part of my remit at Flight and ICIS is to ensure that our magazines are not just online text versions of the printed articles, but a different, richer, offering. This could include things such as the original recorded interview available as a podcast, truly interactive information graphics and video.

Now, to get to this stage means that the information gatherers (aka journalists) think about how they gather the information, what information they gather and how it will appear. In the past, the final offering was a double page spread with a picture of the bloke being interviewed, the location (maybe) and a couple of links at the end to relevant websites. Obviously (I say obviously, but you'd be surprised how many people don't or won't get it) it's time to think about all the stuff that can be offered, then pare it down for print.

This means, arguably, a different approach to laying out a feature if you have the rich version online. Do you have the full text article online or just in print? Do you have an extended (uncut?) version online or have a precis and refer to the print version?

My concern is that the design of both print and web complement each other. It reinforces the brand awareness. As Mark Porter, Creative Director at the Guardian, said at a symposium late last year, the online version doesn't need to look exactly like the print version. Elements can be used that are common to both. For example the colour palette or pullquote style, even some of the font usage. And refer to the print version as well.

Designers need to be able to lay out a web page as easily as they can a printed page. An online version of Quark or InDesign. Something that is as easy to use as these packages, with similar functionality such as style sheets, text control and colour palettes. There are few things more depressing than creating a visual of a web page then giving it to the developers to code and getting something that sort of looks like what you want, but Microsofted (Mac users, you know what I mean, the subtleness of a Mac is lost somehow missing on a PC). But it's not just the ability to use a software package. Print designers need to be retrained to appreciate how a web page works: type usage, where does the reader look first, image use, colour use. We designers are visually literate and know the mechanics of a printed page, it shouldn't take much to build on that. A lot of editorial designers I know were put off web design because of the perceived notion of all the coding that would need to be done. And why should we have somebody else lay out the feature on the web? After all, if you've gone to great lengths in commissioning a photograph or illustration, you would've thought about how it was going to work with the rest of the layout – the interaction with the headline or standfirst, for example. Obviously if you are commissioning this stuff (lucky you!) then you'll also be able to think about how it will be used on the web.

And as Karl said in his blog, new skills will also have to learnt: maybe a bit of Flash or some video editing, for example. This should be straightforward. A lot of designers already dabble with this sort of stuff, even if it's in their own time. We are already heading back to the time when designer meant just that, a DESIGNER who can (and want to) turn their hand to most design problems. Think of Eric Gill: type designer, architect, sculptor, engraver and artist; or Neville Brody, type designer,  who went from record sleeve design, to art director of seminal publication the Face, to web design (the Guardian website, for one) and online communication. He redesigned the Times a couple of years ago.  

At RBI we are moving our web platforms over to something called EpiServer. This, apparently, will offer us a lot of the functionality we (as magazine designers) would like. We are told it will be as easy to use as InDesign, It will offer a host of other things as well, such as the ability to move things around a screen a la Netvibes. It is also being touted that it so easy to use anybody can design a page and upload it.

This is where I start to have reservations. Not everyone has a designers' eye for detail or composition or colour awareness. And not to detract from the enthusiasm that these people have, there needs to be safeguards in place so that the professional image of the brand/publication are not damaged. Printed publications have a workflow in place to ensure the best possible product is delivered in the time available. It would be reasonable to assume that a design workflow suitable for web-first publishing is established to ensure that high standards are maintained. Designers need to be part of this discussion.

What do you think?

It is my job

I checked out the blog of Paul Kurzeja, one of the panelists at Tuesday's Big Debate. Some really interesting posts if you're into the future of publishing and marketing. A couple of posts caught my eye: this one, from June, about content and the way it is marketed. The other is more recent and is a speech made by Chad Hurley, one of the You Tube co-founders.

What is apparent from both is that more free content, distributed in an appropriate way, can actually build loyalties to a brand, publication or tv network. Also, that the traditional centralized distribution hub is on its way out. I like the statement:

“There is no old media. There is no new media. There is one media with one common purpose; to inform, move and inspire the world through information, art and entertainment.” – Chad Hurley, co-founder You Tube,  16 October 2008

I think these are exciting times to be a designer in publishing. It's like being back at art college where you get a chance to do a bit of everything – video, photography, graphics, illustration, etc. For years I've thought that the role has been in a straightjacket. Modern technology is now allowing us to participate, on a professional level, in what a lot of us do in our spare time. We, as trained and educated professionals in visual skills, can now start to influence the look and feel of a magazine beyond the printed page. We can now say how the content should be looking on the web, and how the pictures, vids, audio, etc will interact. The role of the designer will become more important as more visual elements are used, not just for layout, but to maintain the visual identity of the publication brand.

The only things holding us back are work colleagues who don't see it as part of our role (journalists deciding how best to crop images or edit video, or marketing people deciding which fonts to use!?), or us – designers, art editors, art directors – in the classic phrase "it's not my job."

The Big Debate

I attended a debate last night in central London titled “The web needs magazines more than magazines needs the web.”

Organised jointly by the Editorial Design Organisation and the British Society of Magazine Editors (BSME) the six-member panel consisted of David Hepworth, editorial director at Development Hell; Mark Porter, design director at The Guardian; Simon Kanter, editorial director at Haymarket Network; Jon Bains, chairman of Lateral, Lateral.net; Colin McHenry, group art director at Centaur; and Paul Kurjeza, creative director at Redwood. The debate was chaired by Andy Cowles, editorial development director at IPC Media.

It was an interesting session which did stray from the topic. It was more about opportunities on the web, with a bit of why print is good towards the end. The main concern seemed to be around how make money on the web while maintaining current readership levels.

Mark Porter concentrated more on the role of art editors and art directors in the future. Instead of just concentrating on just print or just online, the art editor/director will be responsible for all material – video, audio, pictures, words, etc – and make them work together. This was good stuff, something that I have been trying to do for a while.

“It is essential to represent the visual quality of the brand.”

Basically, if you have a print product you can't replicate it online, but you can represent it by using some of the same design features – be it the colour palette, space, etc.

Jon Bains said that it was essential that content was created "media neutral", ie. write something then repurpose accordingly. Something we've been doing here for a while.

David Hepworth thought that a lot more could be done with the spoken word via podcasts. Interestingly, when he asked how many people in the auditorium were bloggers, only a small handful of us raised our hands (there were 150-or-so people attending).

One intersting point was everyone's dislike of digital magazines. They were seen as more of a way to get money than offer anything useful.

The hour and a half was over just as the debate was getting going. There was no real conclusion (or vote) to the title of the debate. There was nothing really new, but it was interesting to hear other people's experiences.  

The hour and a half was over just as the debate was getting going. There was no real conclusion (or vote) to the title of the debate. There was nothing really new, but it was interesting to hear other people's experiences, not least because it seems that consumer publishing is where we were here at RBI towers a couple of years ago. The arguments being raised were all familiar.

It seems to me that because B2B publishing has to deliver essential content to a readership/audience who use it in a professional environment and to enable them to do their job, (ie. they had computers at work before they had them at home), the B2B world embraced the new technology (well not all, but that’s another story) and made it work. Now that a lot of consumer-oriented things are now part of every day life (You Tube, iTunes, RSS) the consumer mag world is trying to get on board.

It seems that some would rather be the dominant, or only, magazine in the market. So will they succeed if the "last man standing” attitude is prevalent?

Why colour matters

I was looking for some info to back up an argument about how colour affects perception of a brand, and I directed to these sites via the excellent Swiss Miss blog:

The first site is called Color Matters. It is a great site covering all aspects of colour and colour theory;

The second site, actually post, was A Guide to Choosing Colors for Your Brand, on the Usability Post site.

 

Top Ten Web Typography Sins

Smashing Magazine has published a list of the Top Ten Typography Sins. Really useful, and welcome aide to convince non-designers why things should be done in a particular way.

Have a good weekend.

patterntap.com – inspiration for web design

Pattern Tap is a where you can get inspiration for web design. It's organised into collections of elements that go to make a complete website, from articles and backgrounds to buttons and 404 pages. Fanstastic.

Via Swiss Miss.

Embedding fonts on the web

Typical. As soon as I go on about not being able to specify particular fonts on the web (see yesterday's post), I find a post to the contrary.

Changing roles

I've been thinking about those RBI magazines that share the same templates. A few people have commented to me about how "terrible" it is that this is happening. For who? The readers? I've been told it is very unlikely that the readers will view more than one of these magazines. As long as the design is imparting the information in an effective (and attractive) manner, does it matter that they look the same?

What about the editorial designers? I mentioned in the original post that it was not so different from web design. A lot of websites are very similar in look and feel. Ones of a similar function, anyway – news or shopping, for example. A lot of the design is dictated by browser-type and the type of machine and connection speed. It is still difficult to specify a font (unless it is a Flash-based site), you can say serif or san-serif, but little more.

It is up to editorial designers to gain new skills and influence the way things are going. Instead of watching the mundane work disappear, we should be demonstrating and emphasizing the value of good design.

It's no consolation, but similar arguments are happening about photography and journalism. The traditional role of the journalist is being challenged, as is the role of the sub-editor. While it appears that subs are doing a designers job on Computer Weekly, the opposite is happening elsewhere. 

In these ever-changing times, it is better to dance on a moving carpet than to stand still and have the rug pulled from under you.

Something else

On a different note, here's an interesting article about internet English and typography from Virginia Heffernan in the New York Times.

Normal service has been resumed: Updated Type is Art link

Well hello. Sorry for the lack of posts, I've been on holiday. Sunning myself in Cyprus.

I'm back at work now. Here's a quick round up of what's been happening...

Creative

For the next couple of weeks I'm working in the Creative department of the company I work for. Doing a sort of job shadow type thing. As I've been working mainly in editorial for the past 15-or-so years I thought it would be good to see how the commercial side of things operate (even though I've been doing this sort fo thing for a while). In our company there is(was?) a them and us attitude between editorial designers and the Creative designers. Each side thinking they were better. So far, I have not experienced this. As far as I'm concerned, design is design, regardless of discipline. We should all support each other. There is too much pressure and competition from the non-design community for there to be tension within.

Anyway, yesterday was day one and I spent a really useful morning with one of the web designers, who critted my work. I found it really useful as so far I have only had feedback from marketing and editorial people. Thanks Mark.

Sexy things

A few other things have happened. I bought a digital camera. I opted for the Canon Sureshot G9 in the end (see post June 25). I am really please with the performance and results.

I also got my iPhone! FANTASTIC! Friday was an interesting day in the search for a 16Gb version. Got one delivered from the Carphone Warehouse in the end.

Largest Apple customer

One interesting snippet of news last week. Axel Springer, one of Europe's largest newspaper publishers, is moving it's entire workforce over to the Mac platform. 10,000 employees worldwide!

Photography exhibition

I went to a viewing of some photography yesterday. It was one of three that I had been invited to. I thought that this one might be a little different, even if the quality might not be great (my own preconceptions). I was impressed by the quality of the work. Some work being better quality than the endless stream of graduates and new start-ups that do the rounds now, wither by email or in person. The one thing that I found refreshing was the originality of the work, not the endless (tedious) stuff trying to emulate the latest fashion mags. These were good. I have to mention that the work was not at some exclusive venue in London, but at the Treloar College near Alton in Hampshire. The photographs were the final displays for the A-level and City & Guilds photography students. The students are all physically disabled.

Cool

And finally, a bit of fun. Take a look at this. Type is Art is a cool project by Jose Rodriguez where you can create art from parts of letterforms. I originally saw it on the I love typography site.

Web design and typography

Business Week have compiled a 10 Commandments of Web Design, complete with an interactive poll and examples for the best and worst designed sites, there are some . I'm pleased to say that this was commandment number 6:

Thou shalt worship at the altar of typography.

At last! If a serious business magazine can recognise that good design and typography is valuable, then the people who read it might spend that extra bit to make their own offerings better.