Charles Miller wrote:
On Apr 8, 2011, at 1:36 PM, Venditelli, Daniel - Web Development
Administrator wrote:
*Can't even begin to count the number of sites that had some
snippet of useful text just begging to be copied into my research
notes only to discover the text is a graphic. <grumble>
Guilty. Flat out guilty. Not necessarily repentant.
Pictures get high readership. A few well-chosen words in the pic do
too.
As many eye-tracking studies have shone, people look for words on a
page, and ignore what they think of as images. They've learned that
images=ads. You fool them by showing them a picture of text, so when
they try to use the "text" as text, they feel deceived and cheated.
Plus with the high number of generic pix slapped onto pages as
content-free phony eye candy, words in photos show a little thought.
A little personalization.
I'd rather avoid using generic pix in the first place.
I'd never put a key piece of word content ONLY in a pic. In fact, I
guess I use them as a mild form of constructive redundancy, or as
teasers to encourage the old art of reading the text.
Or they're used by graphic-designers-turned-web-designers desperately
trying to get back the exact font control they have on their printed
products.
--
David
[email protected]
authenticity, honesty, community
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [[email protected]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
