There were several great responses to the posters I chose.
“For the first poster you stated, “since there are already so many other challenges in reading it I feel like the font was a good choice.”
This is a great observation, I totally agree that with the choices they made with the rest of the poster the font was a saving grace… The bold, heavy approach helped the eye grab more of each letter….I think contrast was an issue with legibility, for me.”
“All of the facts are legible, but sometimes a little crushed.”
“I don’t understand why “World Water Day” is so secondary in the poster.”
Most of the responses were had some positive comments and some critical comments. I agreed with many of them. Some people even talked about aspects I had not notices. Andrea and I both agree that the simple font choice was good based on all the other challenges the reader faces in reading this poster.
Melissa talked about the legibility of the text. I agree with her that is does seem like certain sections are a little too small or “crushed”.
The designer could have used a little bigger point size to help the reader out a little.
Joy mentioned that “World Water Day” looked like a secondary or after thought. I did not notice at first but after she showed me now it sticks out like a sore thumb. I cannot look at the poster without wondering what the designer was thinking using three different fonts on the same poster.
It was great to get all the feedback and comments on my choices. It is interesting that we all can look at the same poster and notice different details. I found that led to a better understanding of the overall poster design for me.