Flatplans

Credit: Diane Parkin

In large-scale content design, such as an annual report, magazine or website, a flatplan is used to show where the intended content will fall at a document level. This ensures that there is an even spread of content throughout the publication.

Using a flatplan allows the editor to quickly see where there are clashes between similar types of article and where additional content is required (or where content may need removing).


Different levels of readership can also be established in the flatplan. Content intended for a general audience, perhaps at the section starts, and those parts for a specialist audience, perhaps placed deeper in the publication.

An appropriate structure for the different content types should be provided (using the LATCH model) to offer the viewer multiple levels of understanding in the most accessible way.

Consideration by the designer of what organisational precedents have already been set, and how the viewer might be expecting to access the information based on their previous experiences, indicates the likely choice for an appropriate editorial structure.

Using a flatplan to provide a pattern (or flow) to the communication at document level, allows information at the story level to build up to a series of ‘destinations’ within the document where decisions can be made (using the AIDA model). In laying out content, a designer should work closely with an editor to establish the flow of the material. This helps to retain the readers attention, creates interest in the subject matter and directs the reader through the information to the call to action.

This principle also works in film. To maintain interest, most films have an invisible narrative structure composed of three, five or seven acts leading to the finale. Each builds up to a ‘destination’, generally a point in the film where a main character makes a decision that alters the course of the narrative. This can be expressed as a flatplan of storyboard frames on a timeline.

[Spoiler alert] For example in Danny Boyle’s Sunshine, the key destination points are Capa’s decision to alter course to rendezvous with Icarus I; his realisation that there is an unknown person aboard Icarus II; and his escape from the airlock to detonate the Stellar bomb.

And you can apply the same narrative structural principles to books, TV, Radio, games...

Scanpaths

Our eyes don’t read in a continuous steady line, but scan for information and look for patterns in a series of rapid left to right skips and pauses, known as saccadic movement.

In order to read efficiently, you recognise word shapes. As you read, you don’t look at individual characters. Instead your eyes scan the x-heights across the word and your brain compares the shape of the word outline with words in your memory, skipping over unfamiliar wordshapes, but creating comprehension based on the context of the surrounding words.

We do this because reading each individual letter in a word would be too time-consuming. Instead the eye moves and pauses as it looks for familiar patterns along a line of text.

The point where the eye pauses is called a fixation, whilst the regressive movement between points is called a saccade. A sequence of fixations and saccades across a design is called a scanpath. (Generally speaking, the number of fixations and saccades and length of time a reader spends on them indicates the relative readability of a typeface.)

In western society, by habit we start reading top left and finish bottom right, so these two areas of the page assume special significance for placing important information. Dominant fixation points like this are known as ‘hotspots’. Placing important information at these points, for example headlines top left, or calls to action at bottom right, help in the exchange of key information.

Research indicates that the human eye has the tendency to follow the same scanpaths when encountering familiar media, so in this situation a designer can place unexpected details or incongruous imagery in the design to create new hotspots to attract the readers attention.

The practical application of this insight is that careful placement of different content types can help lead the readers eye around a page or screen, create interest and/or understanding and improve the structural hierarchy of the communication.

Type readability

The ability to read quickly and to understand what is being read depends on good typographic design reducing the effort required to comprehend the text. (It also requires good writing and copyediting, but that’s for another post.)

For readability, the choice of typeface, upper and lower case (U&lc), typesize, leading, line length, margins and paper colour and all need to be combined to produce readable copy.

For instance, most books are set using a serif font rather than sans-serif, because the serifs help the reader’s eye to rapidly scan along the lines of type on a page. This gives U&lc serif faces a high readability factor for longer passages of text.

Whilst sans-serif faces generally have a relatively low readability factor when set to longer line lengths, they have high readability factor on signage and when set in shorter line lengths. Sans-serif offers a sense of urgency, enabling the reader to scan quickly down the copy and assimilate information – a more appropriate reading experience for signs and magazines.

Common text type sizes tend to be between 9 and 12 point (depending on font) with leading set automatically by design software at around 120% of the typesize. This should always be adjusted by the designer with an appropriate amount of leading determined by the design. As a rule of thumb, for normal text, leading should be increased proportionally until around 14 point, when it should be decreased proportionally until around 18 point, after which it should be set solid (ie. 18/18pt). With larger type sizes and headlines, the leading should be further reduced to avoid creating too much space between lines.

In typesetting for legibility, the leading should never be less than the spacing between words, otherwise the readers eye is drawn down rather than across the page. However headline setting can often be set solid, or even to a minus value, without affecting readability. For longer measures, the leading might also be increased so it provides stronger definition to the line of text. As a rule of thumb, the longer the line, the greater the leading required.

In English, the line length normally contains between 50 and 80 characters for readability, resulting in an average of nine to 12 words per line. Scientific and technical papers, which are likely to contain longer words, tend to need a longer measure.

Finally, the margins around the type should allow enough white space to allow the reader’s eye to rest momentarily until it scans back to the start of the next line.

Note that glossy white paper, whilst great for images, makes text difficult to read.

So, so as long as you print on a matt paper stock, readability is governed by the designers ability to structure typeface, case, size, leading, line length and margins into a compelling design.

Type legibility

Legibility is the degree to which individual letters in a typeface can be distinguished from each other. Generally, the most legible fonts have a well-balanced proportion of form (the actual letter) and counterform or counter (the ‘holes’ in the letter). The best designed typefaces tend to have larger counter spaces, and due to their frequency of appearance in text, the most helpful aid to legibility is a generous ‘eye’ for an ‘e’ and an enclosed counter for an ‘a’.

However, for any given font size, too large a counter and corresponding x-height means too short an ascender and descender for clarity between other letters. The characters most commonly mistaken for each other are I, j, l and f and t, so the most legible typefaces need to strike the right balance between the size of the counter and x-height and size of ascender and descender.

Whilst problems of legibility can exist in the design of letterforms in individual fonts (for example lowercase Garamond h and b are easily confused, as are the capital I and lowercase l in Arial), research into typographic design for children by the University of Reading suggests that there is no intrinsic difference between the legibility of serif or sans-serif typefaces. Instead, the context in which they are used assumes greater significance.

Two well-documented experiments on the legibility of type are Emile Jamal’s 1878 demonstration that showed that the top half of a line of upper and lower case (U&lc) type is more legible than the bottom half when only half of the line is exposed, and the 1960’s London Transport tests on all caps or U&lc for bus signage. These series of experiments suggested that whilst there is no definitive proof that lower case is visually superior to all upper case, a mix of upper and lower case was more popular with the public.

This fed into the development of the UK motorway network signage when the Ministry of Transport’s Design Research Unit developed one of the most ambitious information design projects ever undertaken in Britain. In tests on signage designs, sans-serif U&lc type with a wide margin was preferred for legibility.

The result of this work suggests that it is not only the visual recognition of the letterform that is important, but also the shape of the word itself and the space that it sits in that the typographer needs to take into account when designing for legibility.

Legibility and readability

Legible type and readable type seem like synonyms, but typographically they are not the same thing.

Legibility refers to the recognition of individual letters and words, whilst readability is the clarity and speed at which content can be read and understood.

The legibility of a typeface is dependent on its design (and perversely some typefaces are deliberately designed to be illegible), whilst readability depends on the skill of the typographer in choosing a typeface and arranging the type well on the page.

One of the more common mistakes designers make is to choose a typeface designed for one purpose and use it for something else for which it is unsuitable. A classic example is the use of the display face Avant Garde as a text font. Equally, you would not use a difficult to read brush script for a fire exit sign where the meaning needs to be read and decoded quickly.

Since the introduction of the Disability Discrimination Act in the UK in 1995 and the Disability and Equality Act in 2010, typographic design needs to be inclusive of people with a wide range of visual impairments. Making sure that your type is structured to be legible and readable was always a hallmark of good design, but now it is a prerequisite.

In the next two posts I'm going to look at little deeper into some of the issues around the legibility and readability of type.

Effective images

How images are framed depends on the overall look and feel that the designer is trying to achieve, but there are various ideas that photographers – and painters – have found useful in creating effective images.

The selection, sizing and cropping of images is directly related to the accompanying text, in that they are either designed to illustrate the text, or the text provides an explanatory note to the image.

A common mistake is to use an image as it is provided, resulting in the use of poorly composed shots without a clear focal point or direction. Wheras any image can be made to work harder if the composition of subject elements is manipulated to communicate effectively with the intended audience.

There should be a good reason behind every image you select. Ask yourself;

• Is your chosen image relevant and meaningful to the audience?
• Is it right for the task and does it make the accompanying words work harder?
• Will the combination of the words and pictures get the reader thinking?
• Will the choice of image provoke the reader to do what you want them to do?

Designer and editor should work with a selection of close-ups, mid and long-range images. They should look to engage more directly with the subject matter and create interest through cropping, using orientation, symmetry or asymmetrical composition and the rule of three.

Cropping
Cropping is the easiest and most effective way to edit an image. This can change the whole emphasis of the shot by removing extraneous or distracting subject matter and manipulating the relationship between the subject elements and the edge of the frame.

Conversely a poor crop can ruin a good image. Be careful not to end up with a crop that is just slightly rectangular, as this communicates a sense of indecision.

Orientation
Picture shapes are normally dictated by the natural arrangement of elements. Landscape images tend to emphasise the relationship between subject elements to the left and right of the frame, whilst portrait images tend to relate background to foreground.

Choosing a landscape format for an image of a person, or using a portrait format for a landscape can produce an unexpected effect or pleasing juxtaposition.

Composition
People are predisposed to prefer symmetrical composition and this is the starting point for editing any image, placing the subject central in the frame. This signifies stability and strength.

However, symmetry can become monotonous and can lack movement. Asymmetrical composition places the subject off centre to create a more dynamic image with tension between the contrasting spaces around the subject.

The rule of three
The rule of three is a useful rule of thumb for asymmetric composition. Dividing the frame into vertical and horizontal thirds creates four ‘sweet spots’ at the intersections of the gridlines. Placing the most important elements of the image on or adjacent to these intersections can transform an ordinary image into one with a stronger composition.

Original image

Image divided into thirds

Image recropped with the subject positioned adjacent to the top right gridline intersection

Using these simple tools, a designer and editor can manipulate images in a structured way and get the most out of their pictures.

The quest for order

A cautionary tale about an obsession with structure
by Tony Pritchard