BB
Some very interesting feedback here. Many thanks, chaps.
Critique: I'm not sure; I think this might come down to an issue of personal taste. I'll keep in mind the suggestion about filling in the space below the clock though. When I tested the layout on my TVs, I found that on the two newer and larger ones, there was a considerable gap beneath the clock which looked fairly inoffensive; but on the smaller, older model, the overscan of the image was such that it left a relatively small gap, which might well bug some people more than others. Something to think about - thanks for weighing in.
AxG: I'm not always a fan of gradients, but in this case, I personally think it works for the breaking news situations in making the supers stand out more than just flat red. Perhaps I'm alone on that.
I take the point about clutter though, and in some ways, I wonder whether the visual separation of elements - i.e. with the gaps - makes this appear more cluttered than it would otherwise. I didn't quite understand your last point though - a darker strip so it lines up with the aston? Sorry, it's probably my fault for not getting it, but if you could clarify, I'd be grateful
baa: World News 16:9 considerations are a fair point. As I mentioned in my preamble, while I certainly aimed to be realistic and comprehensive in my considerations, I certainly took some creative licence with putting this set together. I don't believe for a moment that the BBC would have the clout to shift to a primarily 16:9 operation in the UK, much less in markets where there there is a demonstrably significant percentage of sets with 14:9 or even 4:3 set-ups.
And yes, I did take into account various screen sizes and SD/HD considerations. With the exception of the local time bug, none of the text within any of these graphics is scaled smaller than the text that the BBC currently uses for its ticker. Almost all other text is larger than this. If the BBC deems that to be an acceptable minimum size currently, I see no reason why it wouldn't do so for any future implementations. Thank you for pointing out that majority of TVs are not my computer screen though. I didn't know that.
The BBC refers to the two versions of its logo as 'stacked' (BBC on top of NEWS) and 'stripped' (BBC alongside NEWS). Some users on here think it's called the 'striped' logo; others think it's called the 'strap logo'. It's not; it's 'stripped'.
DrewF: Many thanks for the kind words. It looks like you're not alone in your thoughts on the gaps!
mdtauk: I know what you mean about the contrast issues between the gaps. I viewed several of the slides at full screen (including the more 'cluttered' ones) on 18", 25", 37" and 50" displays, and on each of these I found the contrast between and among foreground and background elements to be much less jarring than at the 338p resolution of the JPEGs in this thread. That said, I can certainly imagine that when streaming on iPlayer, for example (particular in a windowed view rather than full-screen), the gaps and contrasts might well end up rather maddening.
Indeed, when I've heard people in the past complain about how boring the current News graphics set is, I've often pointed out to them that it was designed that way so that it works at all resolutions and sizes with minimal artefacting, blur and contrastastrophes. In this design set, I've clearly ignored my own knowledge in this regard. While I believe these graphics would work perfectly well on most TVs or in full-screen on computer displays, the gaps would likely present issues on small mobile displays, for example; the current 'boring' graphics set certainly does a better job of considering this scenario than my set does.
DJ Dave: Fair enough - thanks for your thoughts.
Barney Boo: Perhaps the solution to the symmetry issue would be to follow Critique's recommendation of filling in the space below the clock?
I think I understand what you're saying regarding the relationship of elements on the screen. Conceptually, the layout isn't all that different to the current one, the biggest difference being that the LIVE/Location bug is at the bottom of the 'column' where it is currently at the top. I'm not sure that the absence of gaps between all of these elements - i.e. bringing them all together in a single mass, as they are now - necessarily improves the clarity of how these elements relate to each other, but I do think that the way items are introduced can help to mitigate the problem. For example, in the slide you selected, Yanka's name super animates onto the screen when she's talking, so it's clear that this refers to her; it then disappears, in the same way that name-checks currently do. It's a contextual graphic which only asks for attention in relation to what's being shown, rather than an extra layer of information that you're constantly being forced to assimilate and map out as part of the whole.
But if it sounds like I'm making excuses for myself here, I'm not - I'm just trying to explain that I think that animation and presenting information contextually can help to tell the story better than these static slides might suggest. Unfortunately, I'm unforgivably awful at animation, so I can't even begin to put these elements into any sort of video format, which is why I stand slack-jawed at the likes of mdtauk/Martin, who have the abilities to do so in such style.
I agree with the general point you're making though, with the fact that it remains an underlying problem, and that whatever animation or order of presentation I might wish to mitigate it with, I frankly failed to solve it with these designs.
Cheers for the feedback, Barney.
Critique: I'm not sure; I think this might come down to an issue of personal taste. I'll keep in mind the suggestion about filling in the space below the clock though. When I tested the layout on my TVs, I found that on the two newer and larger ones, there was a considerable gap beneath the clock which looked fairly inoffensive; but on the smaller, older model, the overscan of the image was such that it left a relatively small gap, which might well bug some people more than others. Something to think about - thanks for weighing in.
AxG: I'm not always a fan of gradients, but in this case, I personally think it works for the breaking news situations in making the supers stand out more than just flat red. Perhaps I'm alone on that.
I take the point about clutter though, and in some ways, I wonder whether the visual separation of elements - i.e. with the gaps - makes this appear more cluttered than it would otherwise. I didn't quite understand your last point though - a darker strip so it lines up with the aston? Sorry, it's probably my fault for not getting it, but if you could clarify, I'd be grateful
baa: World News 16:9 considerations are a fair point. As I mentioned in my preamble, while I certainly aimed to be realistic and comprehensive in my considerations, I certainly took some creative licence with putting this set together. I don't believe for a moment that the BBC would have the clout to shift to a primarily 16:9 operation in the UK, much less in markets where there there is a demonstrably significant percentage of sets with 14:9 or even 4:3 set-ups.
And yes, I did take into account various screen sizes and SD/HD considerations. With the exception of the local time bug, none of the text within any of these graphics is scaled smaller than the text that the BBC currently uses for its ticker. Almost all other text is larger than this. If the BBC deems that to be an acceptable minimum size currently, I see no reason why it wouldn't do so for any future implementations. Thank you for pointing out that majority of TVs are not my computer screen though. I didn't know that.
The BBC refers to the two versions of its logo as 'stacked' (BBC on top of NEWS) and 'stripped' (BBC alongside NEWS). Some users on here think it's called the 'striped' logo; others think it's called the 'strap logo'. It's not; it's 'stripped'.
DrewF: Many thanks for the kind words. It looks like you're not alone in your thoughts on the gaps!
mdtauk: I know what you mean about the contrast issues between the gaps. I viewed several of the slides at full screen (including the more 'cluttered' ones) on 18", 25", 37" and 50" displays, and on each of these I found the contrast between and among foreground and background elements to be much less jarring than at the 338p resolution of the JPEGs in this thread. That said, I can certainly imagine that when streaming on iPlayer, for example (particular in a windowed view rather than full-screen), the gaps and contrasts might well end up rather maddening.
Indeed, when I've heard people in the past complain about how boring the current News graphics set is, I've often pointed out to them that it was designed that way so that it works at all resolutions and sizes with minimal artefacting, blur and contrastastrophes. In this design set, I've clearly ignored my own knowledge in this regard. While I believe these graphics would work perfectly well on most TVs or in full-screen on computer displays, the gaps would likely present issues on small mobile displays, for example; the current 'boring' graphics set certainly does a better job of considering this scenario than my set does.
DJ Dave: Fair enough - thanks for your thoughts.
Barney Boo: Perhaps the solution to the symmetry issue would be to follow Critique's recommendation of filling in the space below the clock?
I think I understand what you're saying regarding the relationship of elements on the screen. Conceptually, the layout isn't all that different to the current one, the biggest difference being that the LIVE/Location bug is at the bottom of the 'column' where it is currently at the top. I'm not sure that the absence of gaps between all of these elements - i.e. bringing them all together in a single mass, as they are now - necessarily improves the clarity of how these elements relate to each other, but I do think that the way items are introduced can help to mitigate the problem. For example, in the slide you selected, Yanka's name super animates onto the screen when she's talking, so it's clear that this refers to her; it then disappears, in the same way that name-checks currently do. It's a contextual graphic which only asks for attention in relation to what's being shown, rather than an extra layer of information that you're constantly being forced to assimilate and map out as part of the whole.
But if it sounds like I'm making excuses for myself here, I'm not - I'm just trying to explain that I think that animation and presenting information contextually can help to tell the story better than these static slides might suggest. Unfortunately, I'm unforgivably awful at animation, so I can't even begin to put these elements into any sort of video format, which is why I stand slack-jawed at the likes of mdtauk/Martin, who have the abilities to do so in such style.
I agree with the general point you're making though, with the fact that it remains an underlying problem, and that whatever animation or order of presentation I might wish to mitigate it with, I frankly failed to solve it with these designs.
Cheers for the feedback, Barney.