tigerrouge
don't look down
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2005
- Messages
- 17,853
- Reaction score
- 7,182
My apprehension about this issue - as always - was that the sparseness of the design would mean you're paying a lot for rather arty yet empty pages. But they've improved on previous issues by taking a trick from the previous Pop, and as honeycombchild described, incorporated different types of paper, so you get the sensation that this is a special magazine. Even approaching the newsstand, I could see the cover was made of paper with a certain texture to it.
That said, in terms of my own tastes, I'm still not overly impressed with their design, I would gladly have swapped a few of those full-page shots of a single shoe for 'collections coverage' where the images are slightly larger. I'm also not a fan of cut-out layering, where there's about forty small silhouettes of models piled on top of each other - I prefer it when an outfit gets some space to breathe in an image.
I can see why they cut away the background, because it means you can pile up the images in a clustered band to illustrate the point that there's lots of outfits in a particular colour this season, but I don't find that layout to be ultimately that useful to me, and it offends my eyes.
There did seem to be a decent amount of written content, and some of the things being discussed seemed interesting enough - it's surprising to say that the text in a collections issue could be a point of interest, but somehow it seems to be, and it's another mark of how this magazine has definitely evolved, and certainly, I thought the reduction in size did it no harm at all.
That said, in terms of my own tastes, I'm still not overly impressed with their design, I would gladly have swapped a few of those full-page shots of a single shoe for 'collections coverage' where the images are slightly larger. I'm also not a fan of cut-out layering, where there's about forty small silhouettes of models piled on top of each other - I prefer it when an outfit gets some space to breathe in an image.
I can see why they cut away the background, because it means you can pile up the images in a clustered band to illustrate the point that there's lots of outfits in a particular colour this season, but I don't find that layout to be ultimately that useful to me, and it offends my eyes.
There did seem to be a decent amount of written content, and some of the things being discussed seemed interesting enough - it's surprising to say that the text in a collections issue could be a point of interest, but somehow it seems to be, and it's another mark of how this magazine has definitely evolved, and certainly, I thought the reduction in size did it no harm at all.
