4 ms·

Did anyone else find the Aikido flyer on the left the most readable? The version on the right might be 'neater' but I was able to absorb the information from t

by _grrr 15y ago

Did anyone else find the Aikido flyer on the left the most readable? The version on the right might be 'neater' but I was able to absorb the information from the left version more easily.

fabiandesimone 15y ago
Yes. The left version, at least for me, conveyed the info more clearly. Oh the ambiguity. Gotta love it :)
arctangent 15y ago
Yes, and it wasn't even a close thing! Advantages of the flyer on the left: - The "Aikido" title has more whitespace around it, making it easier to distinguish as a separate visual element from the photograph and making it easier to see from a distance (as would be necessary for a flyer). - The text below the photo is larger than the version on the right hand side, and does not have a confusing symbol following it. (Presumably this symbol is something Aikido-related.) - The text in the top-right box is centered and bolded for clarity. The alignment in the second flyer makes no sense, and in combination with the closeness of the title and the photo the whole top part of the flyer looks pinched together. - The telephone number is large and easy to read. It's even preceded by a call to action ("Call xxx")! - The URL is larger, bolded, and capitalised for easy comprehension.
zmmmmm 15y ago
Yes. While the LHS version has some obvious issues & glitches I found the inconsistent fonts on the right to be annoying and so small that they deemphasized important information such as the times of classes. Some of the removed formating changed the meaning to me - eg: putting "PLEASE COME AND VISIT" in upper case and bold may be tacky but it really emphasizes one of the most important "calls to action" on the flyer. I really couldn't decide which one I liked better at the start.
Jabbles 15y ago
Surely the largest difference between them is the change in font? Why is that not discussed? Also, I thought (though I am no expert) that a general aim was to limit the number of font styles. Why has he added a serif style?
nonrecursive 15y ago
Hi, I made the site. Your criticism and the other points in this thread are valuable to me - so thanks. When writing the site, I showed the before & after to a few non-designers, and every single one had the impression that the right-hand flyer looked better. In my opinion, that's key - if something _looks_ more understandable, it's more likely to be read. If something _looks_ hard to digest, people aren't even going to bother. The readability may look like an issue on the site, but when the flyers were actually printed, the apparent problem no longer actually looked like a problem. @Jabbles - yes, the font differences were a large difference that I don't mention anywhere. Using a sans-serif font for the headers and a serif font for the text creates more contrast, making the headers stand out more and making the headers and details more easily distinguishable from each other. A number of the points made are excellent ones, and I wish I had incorporated them. For example, the contact information should have been way, way more prominent. Capitalizing the URL is something I've never considered in the three years since I made the flyer, but I can see how that would help. Thanks again for all your criticisms. I've never created a site like this before, and man, was it difficult for me. I spent at least 200 hours on it, going over the text and examples over and over again. There's much, much more I'd like to do with it, and there are many flaws I want to address, but for now I feel like it's more important that it's just out there.
- andrewcooke 15y ago
  your design certainly looks more "current" and "professional", which people will class as better. but that's not the same as more understandable, which is something you can actually measure. for example, you can do random trials, showing people a flyer for a short length of time and then asking questions about it. so you're obviously capable of making something that fits in with current taste. but you haven't proved that your version is more understandable. if you want the cachet of a "scientific" justification for your design then you have to do the science. tacking on an assertion doesn't really cut it.
  - nonrecursive 15y ago
    All very true! I am taking a break from this site for the time being, but when I revisit it, I plan on: * Creating new before & after examples from scratch, hopefully with fewer flaws * Adding a section on going through the process of redesigning something * Adding more resources But no, I'm probably not ever going to do the science, unless somehow I get paid for the time I spend doing so.
ZeWaren 15y ago
Agreed. I think the ratio design/information is too big for the one on the right.
deskamess 15y ago
I agree. The right side image has sub heading fonts that keep 'popping out' as you read the right portion ('regular classes' and 'come visit'). It interrupts the flow of reading and visual appearance. The left side image uses bold to highlight these sub headings, and the smaller font size maintains a readable flow. In my opinion, the context of the sub heading/text has not changed enough to warrant such a large font.
tallanvor 15y ago
Definitely. To me, the following each makes the design on the right less readable: 1. The box around the picture draws your eyes more, as does the circle added at the bottom, but neither of those elements provide important information, they're simply distractions. 2. The fonts used are harder to read. 3. Removing the lines in right column slows your ability to parse the information. 4. The address, phone number, and website, some of the most important information, no longer stands out at all. Some of the alignment changes on the right are better, but on the whole, the original is much more likely to get peoples' attention.
flocial 15y ago
The left side emphasizes content more like class times while the right has nice headers that steals focus from the important information. At least to me. Maybe I'm more used to these cookie cutter newspaper type ads.
benmccann 15y ago
I found the version on the right more readable. That being said I wonder if there isn't a reason you often see flyers like the version on the left. I think it'd be much more informative to A/B test the two and see which is more effective.
upthedale 15y ago
I disagree. I haven't read the full article yet, so I haven't read any justification for the design choices, which I think is useful to give my initial gut feelings. Also, IANAD (I am not a desginer). I find the LHS to be so messy and inconsistent that at a quick glance, I almost feel like it would be too much effort to digest the information. The use of centre-aligned text is probably the culprit, with the inconsistency of font-size and weighting contributing to this. On the RHS, I personally find it much easier to just scan my eyes down the 2 columns of text to find useful information. The alignment of the days and times in the regular classes section is particularly easier to read I find.
LarryA 15y ago
I preferred the right; the only thing I saw as a problem was the place name was not emphasized at all. At least having Portsmouth Akido in bold type would give the viewer a cue to find the name. If the flyer is on a wall and not a handout then the audience needs to locate the name.
smackay 15y ago
I found the flyer on the left quite readable but that was probably influenced by my expectation that it was from a newspaper classified section or similar publication where the formatting options can be quite limited. Once I read the article I agree that as a flyer the design on the right works better. From this I take that the context in which the information is presented is also quite influential on people's ability to assimilate the information being presented.
hrabago 15y ago
I found the version on the left quite readable. Then I thought - this is a website of someone who wants to teach others about design, so the correct answer is likely the right one. I saw the design principles in play - the justification, the section headers, etc. However, without wondering what a designer would consider as the correct answer, I'd say the left one was more readable. What does that say about designers (or me)?
njharman 15y ago
They both have problems. But I too thought the left one (while amateurish designed) sucked less that the right one. Right side had too many font styles, not enough whitespace, "towards center" justification (which makes me think of web equivalent -> rotating flaming skulls!), no clear path for my eyes to follow. My biggest complaint is utter lack of left right (horizontal) balance. Maybe that is good print design (a subject I quit paying attention to in the 90's).

by _grrr 15y ago

Did anyone else find the Aikido flyer on the left the most readable? The version on the right might be 'neater' but I was able to absorb the information from the left version more easily.

fabiandesimone 15y ago

Yes. The left version, at least for me, conveyed the info more clearly. Oh the ambiguity. Gotta love it :)

arctangent 15y ago

Yes, and it wasn't even a close thing! Advantages of the flyer on the left: - The "Aikido" title has more whitespace around it, making it easier to distinguish as a separate visual element from the photograph and making it easier to see from a distance (as would be necessary for a flyer). - The text below the photo is larger than the version on the right hand side, and does not have a confusing symbol following it. (Presumably this symbol is something Aikido-related.) - The text in the top-right box is centered and bolded for clarity. The alignment in the second flyer makes no sense, and in combination with the closeness of the title and the photo the whole top part of the flyer looks pinched together. - The telephone number is large and easy to read. It's even preceded by a call to action ("Call xxx")! - The URL is larger, bolded, and capitalised for easy comprehension.

zmmmmm 15y ago

Yes. While the LHS version has some obvious issues & glitches I found the inconsistent fonts on the right to be annoying and so small that they deemphasized important information such as the times of classes. Some of the removed formating changed the meaning to me - eg: putting "PLEASE COME AND VISIT" in upper case and bold may be tacky but it really emphasizes one of the most important "calls to action" on the flyer. I really couldn't decide which one I liked better at the start.

Jabbles 15y ago

Surely the largest difference between them is the change in font? Why is that not discussed? Also, I thought (though I am no expert) that a general aim was to limit the number of font styles. Why has he added a serif style?

nonrecursive 15y ago

Hi, I made the site. Your criticism and the other points in this thread are valuable to me - so thanks. When writing the site, I showed the before & after to a few non-designers, and every single one had the impression that the right-hand flyer looked better. In my opinion, that's key - if something _looks_ more understandable, it's more likely to be read. If something _looks_ hard to digest, people aren't even going to bother. The readability may look like an issue on the site, but when the flyers were actually printed, the apparent problem no longer actually looked like a problem. @Jabbles - yes, the font differences were a large difference that I don't mention anywhere. Using a sans-serif font for the headers and a serif font for the text creates more contrast, making the headers stand out more and making the headers and details more easily distinguishable from each other. A number of the points made are excellent ones, and I wish I had incorporated them. For example, the contact information should have been way, way more prominent. Capitalizing the URL is something I've never considered in the three years since I made the flyer, but I can see how that would help. Thanks again for all your criticisms. I've never created a site like this before, and man, was it difficult for me. I spent at least 200 hours on it, going over the text and examples over and over again. There's much, much more I'd like to do with it, and there are many flaws I want to address, but for now I feel like it's more important that it's just out there.

andrewcooke 15y ago
your design certainly looks more "current" and "professional", which people will class as better. but that's not the same as more understandable, which is something you can actually measure. for example, you can do random trials, showing people a flyer for a short length of time and then asking questions about it. so you're obviously capable of making something that fits in with current taste. but you haven't proved that your version is more understandable. if you want the cachet of a "scientific" justification for your design then you have to do the science. tacking on an assertion doesn't really cut it.
- nonrecursive 15y ago
  All very true! I am taking a break from this site for the time being, but when I revisit it, I plan on: * Creating new before & after examples from scratch, hopefully with fewer flaws * Adding a section on going through the process of redesigning something * Adding more resources But no, I'm probably not ever going to do the science, unless somehow I get paid for the time I spend doing so.

ZeWaren 15y ago

Agreed. I think the ratio design/information is too big for the one on the right.

deskamess 15y ago

I agree. The right side image has sub heading fonts that keep 'popping out' as you read the right portion ('regular classes' and 'come visit'). It interrupts the flow of reading and visual appearance. The left side image uses bold to highlight these sub headings, and the smaller font size maintains a readable flow. In my opinion, the context of the sub heading/text has not changed enough to warrant such a large font.

tallanvor 15y ago

Definitely. To me, the following each makes the design on the right less readable: 1. The box around the picture draws your eyes more, as does the circle added at the bottom, but neither of those elements provide important information, they're simply distractions. 2. The fonts used are harder to read. 3. Removing the lines in right column slows your ability to parse the information. 4. The address, phone number, and website, some of the most important information, no longer stands out at all. Some of the alignment changes on the right are better, but on the whole, the original is much more likely to get peoples' attention.

flocial 15y ago

The left side emphasizes content more like class times while the right has nice headers that steals focus from the important information. At least to me. Maybe I'm more used to these cookie cutter newspaper type ads.

benmccann 15y ago

I found the version on the right more readable. That being said I wonder if there isn't a reason you often see flyers like the version on the left. I think it'd be much more informative to A/B test the two and see which is more effective.

upthedale 15y ago

I disagree. I haven't read the full article yet, so I haven't read any justification for the design choices, which I think is useful to give my initial gut feelings. Also, IANAD (I am not a desginer). I find the LHS to be so messy and inconsistent that at a quick glance, I almost feel like it would be too much effort to digest the information. The use of centre-aligned text is probably the culprit, with the inconsistency of font-size and weighting contributing to this. On the RHS, I personally find it much easier to just scan my eyes down the 2 columns of text to find useful information. The alignment of the days and times in the regular classes section is particularly easier to read I find.

LarryA 15y ago

I preferred the right; the only thing I saw as a problem was the place name was not emphasized at all. At least having Portsmouth Akido in bold type would give the viewer a cue to find the name. If the flyer is on a wall and not a handout then the audience needs to locate the name.

smackay 15y ago

I found the flyer on the left quite readable but that was probably influenced by my expectation that it was from a newspaper classified section or similar publication where the formatting options can be quite limited. Once I read the article I agree that as a flyer the design on the right works better. From this I take that the context in which the information is presented is also quite influential on people's ability to assimilate the information being presented.

hrabago 15y ago

I found the version on the left quite readable. Then I thought - this is a website of someone who wants to teach others about design, so the correct answer is likely the right one. I saw the design principles in play - the justification, the section headers, etc. However, without wondering what a designer would consider as the correct answer, I'd say the left one was more readable. What does that say about designers (or me)?

njharman 15y ago

They both have problems. But I too thought the left one (while amateurish designed) sucked less that the right one. Right side had too many font styles, not enough whitespace, "towards center" justification (which makes me think of web equivalent -> rotating flaming skulls!), no clear path for my eyes to follow. My biggest complaint is utter lack of left right (horizontal) balance. Maybe that is good print design (a subject I quit paying attention to in the 90's).