Micro Mart Forum / Magazine/Website Feedback & Suggestions / The Micro Mart Magazine / Micro Mart Forums / Magazine Colour Scheme / Latest Posts

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

JamesW — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 17:03:47 GMT

Is it just my copy, or has the text weight (letter thickness) been increased a bit? (issue 1022)

I'm no cognitive psychologist, but I think it's an improvement as far as readability's concerned.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

ricedg — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:50:29 GMT

Well that's because you're a hawkeye.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

hawkeye050 — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 14:03:44 GMT

i have to say ive been reading mm mags for nearly 2 years and ive never had a problem with reading the text on the pages :P

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

BigRon — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 01:12:37 GMT

During a prolonged absence from the forum, I too found myself reading what was then the latest issue and wondering to myself how and why sections of the magazine were all but illegible. No surprise then when revisiting the forum and I found other people asking the same question. (I make the point to demonstrate that at least two people reached the same conclusion, independently and without prior collusion.) However, there's usually a small pile of MM's beside my bed, so fishing the offending issue from the pile was fairly effortless.

Issue 1019, dated 28th August, was the issue that offended my eyes (which sit behind varifocal spectacles which cost several hundred quid more than those from the pound shop) It's the section just before page 100 that's least legible: "booking entertainment online". Black on "pinky brown" or "dirty gold" does NOT provide a good contrast between typeface and background. Elsewhere, on the other hand, black on sulphur yellow was [b] [i]very [/i][/b]readable. My degree subjects (more years back than I care to remember) were psychology and politics... which might seem completely irrelevant, except for the fact that this topic is covered very thoroughly within [b]cognitive psychology[/b] People confuse psychology with psychiatry, but (for example) the Royal Mint employs a psychologist when developing new coins; he's able to tell them how different the new coins have to be from the old ones to be readily recognised by touch. I'm not suggesting that MM hires a cognitive psychologist - but the area is sure to be well documented in terms that even a complete layman can follow. Much of cognitive psychology is about studying stuff that people [b]already[/b] "know". The difference being that the cognitive psychologist won't just pass off his opinion as something he "knows" - he'll be able to quote precise figures and conclusions based on careful research. I'm a big fan of E.Colin Cherry - the man called in by the Air Ministry to tell them how many planes can safely be entrusted to an Air Traffic Controller before you get bits of burning aircraft dropping out of the sky. And that question is one that requires a load of other ones to be answered first; studying legibility being part of it.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

marc.knuckle — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:11:31 GMT

fair enough, maybe just my copy. i thought it should be brought up in this thread as i wanted to be fair to both sides of the debate if applicable.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

PlaneMan — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:51:26 GMT

[quote][b]marc.knuckle (26/06/2008)[/b][hr]the colour scheme which is black on blue isn't ideal even though it isn't too bad but the actual print quality is terrible in at least my copy and i would guess this is the same as everyone else's. the letters seem blurry as if there is a ghost of each letter very slightly of centre which makes it uncomfortable to read. [/quote]

Mine is fine, no problems at all.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

marc.knuckle — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:46:03 GMT

i appologise for bringing this back up but...

origionally i defended the magazine mainly in my last post on this thread but this weeks mag, received yesterday, has promted me to re-post.

the first article about ISP's, very good by the way, the colour scheme which is black on blue isn't ideal even though it isn't too bad but the actual print quality is terrible in at least my copy and i would guess this is the same as everyone else's. the letters seem blurry as if there is a ghost of each letter very slightly of centre which makes it uncomfortable to read. i am sure it is a print error and not the author or editor's fault however the fact remains that it confirms to an extent the origional posters probelm, admittedly not through the colour scheme mainly but just quality.

i posted this as i believe in being fair to both sides of an argument if applicable.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Drumvesta — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:16:02 GMT

Thank you for taking this seriously, Simon, it is much appreciated.

I have no doubt we will now see an improvement in the next few weeks.

Many thanks!

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

TheEditor — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 08:36:16 GMT

I've dug back through the past ten issues, and have found one feature that we should have been more careful on. It was a freelance design piece, as it turns out, so I'm having a chat with the external designers we used just to tighten this back up a little.

Thanks for all the feedback on this thread.

Simon

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

FM — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:46:32 GMT

I think that people should stop trying to blame people's eyesight.

There are just some colour combinations that even people with perfect vision will struggle to see.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Dwynnehugh — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:18:26 GMT

Glad you understood my point!:D

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

alex3410 — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:29:40 GMT

i cant hear it either, and no that's different that sound works because the ears of younger people can pick up higher frequencies

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Dwynnehugh — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 08:57:37 GMT

Using your analogy Alex - I can't hear the "Mosquito" (Hoodie mover) so therefore all those who can must have a hearing problem. :D

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

alex3410 — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 21:38:51 GMT

don't shout :P but you could possibly be slightly [url=http://www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk/articles/article.aspx?articleId=532#] Short sighted[/url] which could explain it?? but IMO its down to personal opinion and in mine the mag layout is perfectly readable and every issue from the last time this was brought up has been.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Drumvesta — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 16:53:25 GMT

As the starter this thread I was not going to come back after replying to Simon........... they drag on if everyone keeps coming back saying the same thing, so I will say something different.

I retired 7 years ago at 55. Up until then I had an annual health check as a condition of employment. 7 years ago the doctor doing the checkup said to me, "I shouldn't say this really, but your eyesight can only be described as phenomenal."

I told him that I'd always known that since I can read signs that other people can't even see. Okay I don't have these checks now but I still have 20/20 vision. I golf at least 5 times a week and I'm the one who always knows where everyone elses ball has gone. I can often see it from where it was hit and the others can't. I don't wear glasses even now at almost 63 years of age.

The problem I highlighted (no pun intended) has nothing to do with needing glasses, nor is it age related. I don't get involved with forums because I find it annoying (grumpy old man mode now) when people keep posting without reading earlier posts. Look at the number of posts here where peolple keep banging on about how wearing specs would help with the problem. It wouldn't! I thought ennieway explained the problem rather well.

Ennieway refers to the editor of a dog magazine who knows 'the rules' and if Simon did, or whoever is ultimately responsible, then this colour issue would disappear.

That's it, I won't post to this thread again so, please, if anyone else mentions specs can someone else scream at them :0)

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

FreakShow! — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:51:14 GMT

[quote][b]MartenReed (09/06/2008)[/b][hr]I generally don't jump in on these things, but I'd just like to say that I've had no problems [b](not bought for about 2-3 weeks)[/b], and I *should* wear reading glasses for it, and without them I can still read it perfectly fine :)[/quote]

*SLAPS*

Stop paying for WOW and buy the mag like a good boy! :P

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

JamesW — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:54:00 GMT

Following oldphart's post, I'd like to suggest a couple of the most significant factors that affect readability, irrespective of colour. The first is point size - obviously larger point sizes (bigger letters) help, but they have to be balanced against the space that larger text requires.

The second is typeface. On monitors, plain sans serif typefaces (like this) are usually thought to be easier to read, and on TV and video they don't generally cause fringing problems with interlaced pictures. On paper, serif fonts (like this) are sometimes preferred for small text because they offer extra little bumps (serifs - the furniture on this h as compared with this h) that can be used to distinguish letters more easily - extra furniture is sometimes necessary because the printing of small letters can be imprecise. Newspaper fonts have serifs, by and large, because the print process is cheap and therefore variable in quality from paper to paper. Some people also think serif fonts look a bit archaic, so they don't suit all applications.

Colour is now a secondary, occasional problem, in my opinion. If it's true that general readability needs improving, typeface and point size are likely to be the most effective tools for the job. Weight (letter thickness) is also worth looking at where the print process is variable in quality.

Apologies if I've offended anyone in this thread - I spent several years picking up this subject from a genuine master of the art of type (sounds a bit like kung-fu, but much less useful in a fight), so I'm a bit militant about it. It's hard work to get type exactly right; there's always a compromise involved.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Dwynnehugh — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:45:51 GMT

But Marten you're but an 18 year old "whipper-snapper".;):D

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

MartenReed — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:16:42 GMT

I generally don't jump in on these things, but I'd just like to say that I've had no problems (not bought for about 2-3 weeks), and I *should* wear reading glasses for it, and without them I can still read it perfectly fine :)

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Dwynnehugh — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:07:49 GMT

Thanks for the reply Simon - I accept what you say, however I am not aware of any other computer magazine that does print in this manner and they too must have the same problems as MM in attracting new readers. But this is a MM issue.

I'm not against colour - far from it - it adds to the magazine, makes it look more attractive - hence more "buyable" (?) to the casual reader.

It does seem that the probelm is an "age" issue and may not be a problem to younger readers - just you wait you bu**ers" until you hit the late 50s and 60+ and then you might also say that that old fart (me) had a point! :P

Let me know when you get to the early 60's - PM me if I'm still alive! :D:D:D - failing that I'll forward you my "final resting place" e-mail address.:w00t: (dwynnehugh@God/Devil.com [delete whichever is non applicable])

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

columbo77 — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:55:54 GMT

I have been reading hte mag for a few years and have also been wearing glasses since childhood and I have to say I have never had any problems reading the magazine,

I have looked through the last two mags after reading this and cannot find anything that would be bad enough to come on here and discuss to this extent.

I would imagine that things like the thin paper are a nessesity to keeping the mag as cheap as it is.

If you cant see it then I would definately get yourself to Specsavers (shamless plug as FS works there, lol)

Keep up the good work I Say Simon.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

TheEditor — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:42:50 GMT

"I wish that someone in the Editorial Staff would answer this question - why do you do it? (is it to appeal to the younger element at the expense of the older variety?). No other computer magazine (or any other type) that I read does this."

No. We don't position Micro Mart towards the younger audience - we target computer enthusiasts across a broad spectrum of ages.

Readability of text is crucial to us, and our designers have worked very hard to mix this, alongside making the magazine attractive to those who browse it on the news stand. The truth of our magazine is that we consistently need to attract new readers, and black text on a white background (and our paper isn't white anyway, to be fair!) doesn't attract people to magazines. They accept it with a book, but not with a magazine. So our challenge is to balance an interesting design without sacrificing readability. As someone with poor eyesight myself - I've needed glasses since I was 4 - I'm very conscious of this, and while I clearly won't say our record is perfect, we do, I feel, continue to improve.

We are looking to shake up some of the design elements again, and appreciate the Readme column being brought to our attention.

Simon

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

oldphart — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 01:50:16 GMT

I have followed the grumps over this 'problem' for a long time now, in various threads. I think that 'bleed' on the cheap paper is partially to blame. Like D Wynne, I am also 'colour perception safe'(cps), which is a military requirement for working on aircraft. This does not really read across to publishing, as there is no requirement, as far as I know, for a body to be cps in publishing. This could be an answer, although I doubt it.

What I have noticed in the past is that what you see on screen, when making up copy, is that it bears only a passing resemblance as to what appears on paper, unless it is in black text on approximately white background.

I suggest, as a trial, that the brightness and contrast be reduced on the MM monitors, and a template of a 'page sized' page be physically stuck onto the monitors.

That way, the originators of the page could 'see' roughly what they are inflicting upon we great unwashed out here.;)

Only joking about the unwashed bits, people:cool:

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

marc.knuckle — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 21:34:51 GMT

firstly i must say that it is sometimes very childish and unnecessary to argue in the way that some people do on this forum, very tiring.

anyway, i just read through the whole of the most recent issue and read perfectly well every bit of it and i most certainly don't have the best eyesight so i can only assume that it must be the minority of people that find it hard to read, however for these people it must be very annoying. these people MUST state what parts of which issues they find hard to read as from my experience reading this issue, it might not be evident to the editor what parts are hard to read.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Dwynnehugh — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:25:15 GMT

Hi James,

We have argued in the past but I see no real reason to continue this. :D

Regards

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

JamesW — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 19:55:20 GMT

'This has been an ongoing issue with MM for a considerable time. Readers have complained over & over, promises of change are made, then it's back to the old colour schemes...In relation to this complaint I don't think the "powers that be" are all that concerned otherwise by now they would have done something about it.'

I don't question your knowledge of the subject, and I never said you'd failed at anything. I still think you have secret yearnings to be a graphic designer. There's no shame in that. ;)

You appear frustrated enough to ignore the fact that these issues have been worked on to the satisfaction of many people, most of the time. This doesn't imply that further improvement is impossible or undesirable, given feedback from readers, which you claim will be ignored, and which 'the powers that be' have openly requested.

In my view, it doesn't help to overstate the problem and then say there's no point trying to fix it anyway. This can only discourage progress. I fear you'll have to accept coloured pages in magazines as a fact of life.

I coloured the text of your quote just to annoy you btw. Be thankful I didn't choose yellow. :P :D

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Dwynnehugh — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 16:51:34 GMT

Hi James,

No, not a failed aspiring g/designer, not frustrated, just a guy who years ago worked on both military and civilian aircraft - where colour combinations were vitally important to safety of the a/craft, those in it, those flying it, those underneath it as it was flying and especially to those tasked with the job of servicing same sometimes under adverse lighting and servicing conditions.

I do feel that I might know just a teeny weeny bit about colour combinations.

In all honesty my original post was to bring to attention of the originator that this was not a new issue and my postings were relevant to the time I read MM.

As this is no longer the case, to be frank, I am little concerned whether MM publishes black text on a black b/ground or white on white.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

FM — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 16:40:43 GMT

If you've ever tried anything like web design or graphic design then you will know just how complex this issue actually is.

Just try and imagine all the different parts involved in the making of a page that you probably don't even think about, here's what I found in a single MM article:

Title text (the colourful text with the sometimes wacky fonts on the background)
Introduction text (the little introduction that says who wrote the article and what it's about)
First letter text (the first letter of an article is always bigger)
Main text (the small font, probably about 8-9pt if I had to guess.
Header text (the subheadings in the article)
Caption text (the smaller bold/italic text next to pictures)
Boxout headings (the headings to the boxouts)
Quote text (the style of text quotes are in)
Page number (alright, this one is pretty constant)
Footer text (the text at the bottom of the page that shows the issue number and the website address)

Now you have to take into account that all these different types of text need to be different, for example if you're skim reading you want to know what each section is about. If it tells you to refer to a boxout, you need to be able to recognise where it is.

Then you also have to make the page interesting, nobody wants to read something that is hard for them, but if it was plain black and white text nobody would want to read that either.

So you've got all these different types of text, you've got a picture for the background that has LOTS of different shades of colours in, how are you going to choose a colour that would look good and readable all over the page?

The answer is: it's damn hard. I sure wouldn't want to be having to do that for every single page of an issue when the lead times are pretty short. I say that given this task the MM team are doing a fantastic job at making the vast majority of issues very readable.

If you want an example of hard to read text then Issue 1002 (1-7 May 2008) at the bottom of page 19, the "Visit us online at" and "Issue 1002" is quite hard to read because some of the colour of Bill's cardigan or whatever it is have made the text very narrow. That's the only example I can think of, but I'm only 17 and I have good vision.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

JamesW — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 14:34:04 GMT

Thank you for taking the trouble to explain it ennieway.

In my experience, it's far easier to solve things if feedback is forthcoming. Please don't be persuaded that nobody cares about it. It's cynical in the extreme to believe that, and not supported by any evidence.

Certainly the use of complementary colours and colour blindness are well known to most graphic designers. I don't know the designers at MM, but I start with the assumption that they approach their work professionally, and think they do a good job generally, and, like any of us, come up with an occasional howler. Often, I'm sure, they work to tight timescales.

Believe me, graphic design thrives on detailed criticism. It's actually very hard for self-critical designers to rate their own work. Ask most people and they say 'fine' or 'lovely' or 'very nice', which is virtually information free.

I'm sure that if someone pipes up every time text is hard to read, the use of colours and the clarity of text can be improved for later issues.

I'm really not saying any more than Simon has already said, though I lack his tact.

If people can't be bothered to bring concrete examples to the table, they might as well not bother at all, because graphic design is all about small details.

Dave H has his own graphics agenda (my theory is that he was born to be a designer but ended up in a different job by accident, hence his frustration), which shouldn't prevent other readers from contributing to the design of the magazine.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Tippon — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 13:59:37 GMT

ennieway: Assuming you're right, and it's not a vision problem as such, but a combination of colours / backgrounds etc. then how would you expect it to ever be resolved unless someone gives the editorial team an example of where the problem occurs?

Another assumption, but the MM staff seem to be unaffected by this, otherwise they would be making sure that their own work was able to be read, so they won't know about the problem unless it's pointed out with examples of where it occurs e.g. P17 left hand boxout where the grey is on the blue (made up example, don't go looking for it :P )

If you can give ANY axample of where you're having difficulty, please point it out so it can be corrected.

P.S. Dave: I'm a bit worried now, I'm well outside that audience :unsure:

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Dwynnehugh — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 11:20:07 GMT

Hi,

I'm not into the technicalities of printing, paper, colour combinations etc. etc., however I have just been on this site:-

http://www.toledo-bend.com/colorblind/ishihara.html

and can see all shapes/numbers etc. that I should as a "non colour blind person". Yet I had difficulty with many MM articles.

I wish that someone in the Editorial Staff would answer this question - why do you do it? (is it to appeal to the younger element at the expense of the older variety?). No other computer magazine (or any other type) that I read does this.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

ennieway — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 10:10:20 GMT

JamesW

I am going to try to explain why discussion is pointles, if I can.... I'm not really qualified even to try.

You ask for examples but they cannot be given. Here's the problem: the condition we are talking about here is suffered (and even that is not the right word) by thousands of people.

It is not to do with eye-sight per se, people with 20/20 vision can have it. It is not to do with colour blindness per se, although it is a form of colour blindness. What happens is reading text of certain colours is made difficult when that text is placed on another colour it does not agree with. It is then that a form of colour blindness occurs. Even though the person can easily and accurately distinguish one colour from another when these colours appear in isolation, put together, or even close together, they merge.

I hope you see what I mean. I accept I have not explained it very well but what I'm trying to say is if I showed you an example you would not see the problem unless you also have the condition, which obviously you don't.

There is a chart/matrix on the net for it somewhere but, for the life of me, I can't find it now and I've been googling like crazy. I know some magazines use this chart (or similar) for exactly this requirement. I know because an editor of a dog magazine told me.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Dwynnehugh — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 23:28:21 GMT

Perhaps you're right Tippon - it may be a plot by someone to remove the old, partially sighted, colour blind, crotchety, readers above the age of 18 years.:D

I decided to jump before I was pushed.:)

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

JamesW — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 21:12:10 GMT

Why is discussion pointless?

These are complex technical and design issues - most of the readability problems (and there were problems, nobody is denying that) - have been dealt with. No doubt there will be exceptions from time to time.

So what's the best way to improve things?

a) Point out the exceptions as they occur, explain why they cause a problem for particular readers.

b) Give up and run away as soon as anyone asks for more specific details of the problem - assume that nobody cares or is prepared to listen.

And in my opinion b) is the reason why this thread is unlikely to be useful.

Go on, give us ONE example to work with.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

ennieway — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 20:46:36 GMT

This problem cannot be cured by buying a £1 pair of specs, as suggested by an earlier poster, nor specs at £200 either.

To understand the problem fully one needs to understand hows eyes work and the effect that mixing colours can have on them. The colours used in MM and the quality of paper used is a recipe for difficult reading, for many at any rate. Glossy paper would make things slighty better but not much. The background streaks running through the text are not good. Much of the text is the wrong colour to suit the background colour it is on. The colour combinations in general seem to have been brought together by a 13 year old lacking style but trying to be funky, or whatever the latest word is.

Drumvester is absolutely correct.... I've bought a copy to check it out, for a great number of people the mag would be hard to read. Equally, for many people there would be no problem at all. As Drumvesta indicates in his/her follow up, if you don't understand these things then discussing it would be pointless.

I used to be a regular MM reader. Doubtless MicroMart understands it's own business best and does not think it necessary to cater for everyone.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

FreakShow! — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 20:33:10 GMT

If you struggle to read the magazine, it may be a good idea to go and see an optician. Squinting at the mag and trying your best will damage your eyes further.

Drop into your local Specsavers (shameless name drop where I work), get an eye test. If you find it's just reading then that's all you need, a pair of readers.

As Johnbarry says though, if it's just readers, then go into poundland with the mag and try a few different strengths out.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Tippon — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 20:29:45 GMT

[quote][b]Dwynnehugh (07/06/2008)[/b][hr]Yes perhaps my last last had a degree of sarcasm in it - deliberately.

However have any of the MM Editorial Staff ever considered they may have readers who have colour blindness problems?[/quote]

Lets be honest Dave, that's not really a fair point. As someone who also pitched in with my views that the colour scheme was spoiling the mag, and as someone who has bought a copy of EVERY issue in between, I have to point out that it is only a small handful of items that now have this problem, the most notable being Simon's own weekly sidebar in the news section and the experts info on their own pages. Last time we brought this up, Simon took note of the thread and promised to make changes. He admitted that this would take some time, and the changes have, for the most part, taken place.

Yes, sometimes an article crops up that has a badly made choice of background, but that happens with almost all colour publications at some point. I don't know about you, but I get much less enjoyment from reading something that looks like a manual. Books get away with it because they suck you into the story, a one or two page article just can't do that in the same way.

What's puzzling me is how much you jump into these threads and criticise, but also make the following statements. If you don't regularly read the mag, how do you know how bad it is?

[quote][b]Dwynnehugh (07/06/2008)[/b][hr]...I'm sorry I longer retain any copies of MM and as previously mentioned that was one of the reasons I gave up buying it...[/quote]

[quote][b]Dwynnehugh (07/06/2008)[/b][hr]

...Certainly up to Jan 08 it was still prevelant - that was the time I ceased buying MM...[/quote]

Please note that I'm not just blindly (or colour blindly ;) ) jumping to the defence of the mag, but sweeping statements with no current evidence don't help your argument. Show me some badly designed content and I'll quite happily pick it apart and try to constructively feedback the problems as much as I can. I genuinely feel that this is the best way to resolve this, even if Simon only orders changes because he's sick of getting emails from readers like you and me ;)

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

JamesW — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 20:17:47 GMT

Dave, I honestly have no idea about that, but since you don't seem to trust what Simon says, you'll probably never know to your satisfaction.

I'm beginning to suspect that behind these 'platitudes' there may be a high-level conspiracy to make MM more difficult to read. In a couple of years, the readership will consist exclusively of teenagers with magnifying glasses, and technically-minded birds of prey.

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

Dwynnehugh — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 19:19:09 GMT

Yes perhaps my last last had a degree of sarcasm in it - deliberately.

However have any of the MM Editorial Staff ever considered they may have readers who have colour blindness problems?

RE: Magazine Colour Scheme

bigdaddy — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 17:13:33 GMT

In the past I have had problems with colour schemes used. I have read most of this week's issue with no problems.
Perhaps the machine minders have been lax in checking colour density and only some copies have the faults complained of.:)