Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 69
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    17,597

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Quote Originally Posted by BelleSerene View Post
    Must be the only magazine I've seen that doesn't put its month of production on the front cover.
    It's on the spine. Odd not to have it on the cover, I admit.
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

  2. #42
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    UK East Coast
    Posts
    33,054

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Quote Originally Posted by JumbleDuck View Post
    It's on the spine. Odd not to have it on the cover, I admit.
    Having it on the cover may have destroyed the purity of the design...

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    17,597

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Here is the start of the word "mast" from Snooks' January review of the Sun Odyssey 440



    and here is the start of the word "mast" from his February review of the Hallberg-Rassy 340



    Same microscope, same scaling. The January "m" is (on the original) 185px high and the February "m" is 195px high, which is a 5% improvement, or at least a 5% increase.



    (Absolutely nothing personal, Snooks - your January review was the first thing I came to with a white background and it was easy to find the same word in February.)
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,525

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Quote Originally Posted by JumbleDuck View Post
    Here is the start of the word "mast" from Snooks' January review of the Sun Odyssey 440



    and here is the start of the word "mast" from his February review of the Hallberg-Rassy 340



    Same microscope, same scaling. The January "m" is (on the original) 185px high and the February "m" is 195px high, which is a 5% improvement, or at least a 5% increase.



    (Absolutely nothing personal, Snooks - your January review was the first thing I came to with a white background and it was easy to find the same word in February.)
    If you need a microscope to notice any difference in size, what does that tell you?

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    2,513

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Quote Originally Posted by westhinder View Post
    If you need a microscope to notice any difference in size, what does that tell you?
    1) You need a microscope to quantify the difference in size

    2) If 10% increase is not noticeable, the original cannot have been so marginally illegible.

    Mike.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Dawlish South Devon
    Posts
    11,565

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Quote Originally Posted by pvb View Post
    Having it on the cover may have destroyed the purity of the design...

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Dawlish South Devon
    Posts
    11,565

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Humm might say that the Font choice is certainly not the best choice for ease of reading, so just perhaps its a reflection not only of Font Size but Font Type, eh ?

    Just maybe the Arty Tarty get in the way of a real choice suitable for ease of reading across a very wide range of Human eyesight's.

    Might suggest consulting with those that know about the actual font Type with reference to the ease and ability to read it to those of us with aging eyesight, after all why go to the great trouble plus expense of producing a written article that less of the population can actually read when one does not have to. eh ?

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    17,597

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Quote Originally Posted by mjcoon View Post
    1) You need a microscope to quantify the difference in size
    I used the microscope because I could not detect any difference in size with the unaided eye.

    If 10% increase is not noticeable, the original cannot have been so marginally illegible.
    I don't see how that follows. Both the original and the new, improved, 5%-supersized fonts are equally annoying to me,
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,525

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Quote Originally Posted by JumbleDuck View Post
    I used the microscope because I could not detect any difference in size with the unaided eye.



    I don't see how that follows. Both the original and the new, improved, 5%-supersized fonts are equally annoying to me,
    Totally agree

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,044

    Default Re: New Look YM.... the FONT of all trouble

    Quote Originally Posted by JumbleDuck View Post
    I used the microscope because I could not detect any difference in size with the unaided eye.



    I don't see how that follows. Both the original and the new, improved, 5%-supersized fonts are equally annoying to me,
    Is it just Yachting Monthly that you find trouble reading, or do you fibd the same with say physical newspapers, some books, any other magazines?

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Latest YBW News

Find Boats For Sale

to
to