The choice of colours for text and background in some panels of the feature on online travel deals (PCA Issue 128, pp 28-30) deserves some kind of award for illegibility. Admittedly I'm in my late seventies and my eyesight ain't what it used to be, but I reckon that specifying purple(?) text on charcoal grey or dark terra cotta (to cite just two examples) does not make for easy reading by people of any age.
I appreciate that this type of inconsiderate graphics design is a subject that has already had an airing or two in these forums, and so I was intrigued to see the heading "Oops, they did it again" above FE's piece on p33, immediately after the travel feature. But I was mistaken, it wasn't FE having a dig at the magazine's graphics designer(s) after all :-]
Could your Art Editor perhaps be persuaded to take a hard look at what (to me at least) is a frequent and infuriating flaw in an otherwise top-class magazine?
I agree, Jim Thing. I seem to remember something similar being raised before, eliciting a response about the need to make the magazine exciting and appealing to the eye. Since the copy is of so little value,I will finish this reply in a white text on a white ba .
What rubbish. Based on absolutely no knowledge of what really goes on, and offensive to the people who work hard to try to make the magazine look attractive when stacked on a newsagent's shelf alongside a dozen other computer magazines.
I have subscribed for many years, so amnot sure what attracts the man in the newsagents. Surely the mag can have variety, interest AND a decent contrast between ink and paper? After all if he buys for the first time, he will only suscribe to future editions if he can read the content comfortably?