Good print design is bad browser design

By Michael Turro
Published on February 8th, 2008
3 Comments

Case in point: Spin Magazine has put it’s entire February issue online - without modification - as a digital magazine (Texterity seems to be the vendor used). Guess what? It is just as cumbersome, awkward, and user-hostile as most attempts at this kind of thing.

What looks to be a wonderfully rich print design is cheapened in the browser by the inability to navigate the thing with any sort of grace. Spin has shoved it’s portrait oriented design into a landscape oriented window with the same mindless determination that a small child might repeatedly smash a square peg relentlessly into a round hole.

Once you get past that first “gee whizz that looks like a page turning” reaction you are left with precious little to chew on. This one trick pony dies a slow death as the reader starts to realize that they are getting a thin and artificial approximation of another media experience instead of an authentic encounter with an organic and thoughtful presentation of editorial content. A simulation instead of a revelation.

Please… for the love of God… when will somebody come along and make this format really work?


algorithmically related posts:

leave a comment:

Viewing 3 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Hi Michael,

    It's not often I'll defend Texterity, but I think your criticism is a bit harsh this time around. In this case, SPIN added iTunes and web links to the bands' websites and MySpace pages. I think this has value... Every week, I read People magazine (blame my wife) and sometimes see cool bands. Because it's in print, I rarely actually look them up online. Hence, I don't interact with the content nearly as much as I could.

    But also - the costs for SPIN to do this instead of creating something entirely different would've made it counter-productive (imo). That's 1 fact that digital edition bashers consistently overlook: that the product provides a decent ROI with minimal investment. While other products could conceivably provide a higher return in terms of visitors and engagement, they'd do so at considerable expense and using resources that most publishers already lack.

    Curious if you checked out Issuu yet? They're still "shoving" a portrait onto a landscape, but the UI is nice. Curious of your opinion.
    • ^
    • v
    Marcus:
    I know... guilty as charged with regard to the harsh tone of the post. But I am getting tired of seeing these kinds of rote implementations. I know that this format can be better and I just want to see it already. The link outs don't do it for me... I can get that from the web site - why do the digital magazine at all? There has to be some benefit that is unique to the format... no? In this version of digital Spin I don't see it.

    And the ROI thing doesn't necessarily hold water with me. Sure if it doesn't cost anything there is no real harm to the bottom line... at least not an immediately apparent one. I just wonder if these kinds of cheaply done, poorly thought out attempts at a new model don't do some damage to the brand. Truthfully, it makes the whole industry look like we're grasping at straws... at least a bit. If it's worth the time and effort to do it isn't it worth the extra time and effort it might take to do it right?

    Saw Issuu briefly and aside from the "free" aspect it seems to me to be more of the same. Though I will say this: since it is free it might be an ideal place to do some experimentation with regard to design. Maybe that's a place where designers can practice thinking about screens instead of pages.
    • ^
    • v
    "Maybe that's a place where designers can practice thinking about screens instead of pages."

    That's really a great idea. A big piece that's missing right now is print designers having the freedom to experiment with the layout. That would go a long way - I think - to helping publishers realize the possibilities

Trackbacks

close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

[in plain sight]

a collection of digital artifacts and random observations culled from the life and mind of Michael Turro [mturro]