No. 4481 Hard to read pages

I have just received issue 4481. I am not at all pleased with pages 662, 664 & 665 where the printing is superimposed over washed out full page photographs. This make the print rather difficult to read especially for an older person like myself. It also make the pages look very messy. This sort of "artistic" work is quite unnecessary in ME even if it may be OK in more trivial magazines aimed at trendy readers.

I sincerely hope that this is one off experiment on behalf of the editorial staff.

Eric

Eric I couldn't agree more If I remember rightly they did this before, I think when Myhobbystore took over the publication As you say it makes it virtually impossible to read

Roy

Yep, agree, just received mine, even with my reading specs, I just cannot bear to look at those pages, due to my particular visionary defect the faded image produces horrendous artefacts with the text, and its just as bad in the digital reader!

I cannot understand the rationale behind doing this, it adds nothing to the subject. I wonder how many more objections will be raised.

I've a good mind to ask for a three page refund!!

If they had have given a free centre punch as a subscription gift you could have gone over the article and then read it in Braille........................

Thanks John,

I was anticipating a helpful and witty response from you

The author provided no illustrations at all so the decision was taken to try to relive, in part, the monotony of very plain text on white paper which, believe it or not, would probably not have been read at all. (Odd, isn't it?)
I agree it might or it might not have worked for some people but at least I know that a lot of people have tried to read it.

If anyone here is genuinely interestd in the article but cannot read it, I would be happy to send a PDF of the pages without the background. Please email me directly (please do not PM me on this).

I have already been told today that "if this continues I will not be renewing... etc etc." Really - it was just a one-off, done for a reason, and is far from the way the magazine will be going in future. Take heed...

Diane

The trouble is these kind of pages look OK when you have a 24" monitor and when you are in pre-publication mode!!

Same applies in bad colour choices for adverts, like blue writing on black ground etc.

Whilst on the subject of ME4481, do we really need to be told how to use 6 new screws to hold the wiper felt cover on a Myford ML7 lathe in a never ending article on refurbishment?

I just thought it looked like some of the grubby drawings I have, no problem here. Thanks Diane.

I agree. I have pretty good eyesight, but nearly gave up on these pages. It's not meant to be a comic, let's assume that the majority of readers are just that, we can read text and don't need lots of pictures

Diane,

I cannot let that statement go by as I find it incomprehensible, unbelievable, et al!  

Edit: Nothing written below to be taken as a personal assault please.

Every book I have/read and that includes all those published by ME, as well as the posts on forums such as this one, are ALL plain text on white.

Edit: We as a species have been reading black/dark text on a contrasting background from day one, with exceptions of course, and nothing as yet has shown we are going psychedelic with our eye sight needs.

No doubt you where shown/quoted research figures from a study by some esoteric think/study/research group/tank who had to spend what was left of that year's budget, otherwise it's deducted from the following year's?

Whenever I come across websites where some hip/trendy graduate has decided to liven things up with coloured backgrounds and text, I go straight past. I've been known to sent a scathing email to the MD.

Don't start me off on that futile nonsense of having to spend/waste money at end of financial year to safeguard next year's budget. STUPIDITY beyond imagination. Actually NO imagination used at all by those who thought it up in the first place and those continuing with the process. No doubt that last remark has made some BPs rise, but I stand by what I've said, and I never practiced that foolishness in my business.

There was/is a much better way of doing things.

Arrows on the way no doubt

Geoff - As you can see I'm back to normal and soap box in use! Whoohoo! Off to the dentist mid-day.

Edited By OuBallie on 30/04/2014 10:56:39

Just to add a word about the overprinted text. I thought that this was a very useful article and just the thing that ME should cover. But the overprint was a distraction as described in previous posts. I'm happy to accept Diane's assurance that this was a one-off.

With great respect to previous incumbents I think that ME is doing very well under Diane's editorship.

Kind regards

John Billard

BTW if you find yourself short of suitable pictures just ask on here. Randomly picking a bit on the middle of the offending page mentioning couplings I think in a day or two we could have produced a selection of 10 examples.