On         Wed, 1 Feb 1995 Lisa Falk <[log in to unmask]> said:
 
 
>I have received a few responses to my query for information on label
design
>and
>readibility (fonts, colors, contrast, size, etc).  Thank you.  More
>information is still welcome.
 
Although I have no suggestions for better label design, I have a long list
of complaints gathered from years of museum going.  Some of these come from
the standpoint of someone who is just beginning to suffer the effects of
age on vision.  My experiences derive from my contact with Art Museums.  I
don't look at labels accompanying other types of exhibits as carefully.
 
Visual Complaints:
Label designers often don't think that what they craft is actually going to
be read.  They design an aesthetic whole without regard to readability or
comprehension.  Among the faults are fonts that are too decorative, point
sizes that are too small, lines with too many words across (about 65
characters across I'd say is optimum).  Low contrasts with backgrounds that
make readers strain.  Angles of vision that give neckaches and lights that
produce glare against the label.  Large items often have labels only on one
side.  The designer should remember that labels are often read at a
distance and line of sight is often achieved through competition with other
viewers.  Labels with long texts justified left and right are especially
annoying, making it easy to lose one's line.  Ragged right should be the
rule for legibility.  Serif fonts are helpful, too.
 
Didactic texts are often ill conceived.  First the item should be clearly
identified.  If a technical term is used in the object name it should be
explained below.  The object should have an accession or catalogue
identification.  If an object's identification contradicts its customary or
traditional designation, it should be so noted.  Explanatory texts should
start with a paragraph intended for the general viewer.  This passage may
be in larger type.  Following paragraphs may relate to some special
feature, contextual or exhibit information, and a third may bring in the
views of other authorities or provide a path to further investigation.  In
any case the viewer should be able quickly to select what kinds of
information to follow, and the labelling system should be consistant
throughout the object grouping so that the viewer can limit or plumb to his
chosen depth automatically.  If exhibits are planned with programmatic
content or if special contrasts are set up, the exhibit plan should
identify these.
 
Obviously not every exhibit situation (permanent or otherwise) can follow
the above schema, but I think that you get the general idea.  One of the
worst sets of exhibit labels I've seen recently were those attached to the
MMA show, "Origins of Impressionism."  The labels were filled with
biographical details that no one could follow and could make sense only to
those viewers who carried a fairly detailed history of early impressionism
with them in their head.  I considered myself at an advantage because some
years ago I had read some of the histories of this period -- but even then,
I thought the wealth of detail stultifying rather than illuminating.
 
 
______________________________________
Robert A. Baron
Museum Computer Consultant
P.O. Box 93, Larchmont, NY 10538
[log in to unmask]