When does a post have too many graphics?
Take a look at this post from 10e20. I’m just curious about something: do you find it easy to read the article?
I didn’t. I got very frustrated trying to find the text between the graphics, particularly when the graphics included screenshots full of text. The headers also distracted me because they were so close together and so huge they overwhelmed the text. And all those images are in my feedreader, too, so that didn’t help.
But I’m weird. I prefer nothing but text, and I know I’m unusual in that preference. I can take maybe one or two photos tucked neatly into the text, never dividing it horizontally so that I might come to an image and not realize I need to scroll down for more text. I loathe video (as in, will not watch it for love ner money). I like my articles the same way I like my fiction: unillustrated.
However, I’m not writing for myself and I realize I’m atypical. So my question to you is: is that article too busy? If so, what would you prefer to be left out? I would’ve been okay with smaller header graphics (like, half as tall) and maybe nicely aligned thumbshots for some of the screenshots so I could click them and view them when I’m ready to switch into image mode.
Apologies to 10e20 for “using you as an example.” 
- Make Wordpress ping only when a new post really goes live
- Learning GIMP
- Modified do-follow plugin lets you no-follow when you need to
- WTF is this “interesting post” trackback spam?
- Shameless Plug – vote for my post on Digg
Categories: Blogging | 
Tags: | 
4 Comments »
January 17th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
I took a peek at the page and as I was starting to read through it, I ended up scrolling – I didn’t read most of it apart from the headlines which were bold and in your face. Stopping only when a headline took my fancy.
It’s a lot of visual stimulation that’s for sure. I’m always looking for new designs and ideas. So I kind of enjoy that sort of look – but for the most part I end up sticking with my RSS feed (I know, I should stop by the actual sites more often) – because it isn’t a visual distraction when I’ve only got so long to read through those sites.
January 18th, 2008 at 8:03 am
Hi Sapphire- I encourage, never anger, at debates like this. I think your opinion is completely valid. Sometimes images can be too much, but if I try to eliminate the amount of clicks a reader has to take to view or grasp my idea. If I made them thumbnails it would be another click, when the text has links if they want to see the real page.
Great post and I hope you had your coffee today
January 18th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Thanks, Patrick, for taking that in the spirit it was intended. The extra click could be an issue, that’s true. And maybe overall the way you do it is perfect for people who prefer to scan for headlines that catch their attention (see Empress’ comment above yours). Like I said, my brain doesn’t seem to work like the majority of people.
One thing’s for sure: the images are gorgeous and yet they load fast. That’s awesome!
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:46 am
I think Sapphire have a good point here.
I had a look on the 10e20 site and all I could see was lots of graphics and text, which in a way turns me down. It seems bit like a funny stuff in there. That was the feeling I got reading 10e20.
I know it is a narrow line but the important thing to make the post acceptable to the wider audience. That is the catch.