Visually impaired graphic designers causing problems for everyone

[VictorTango777]

Over the past several years, there has been a growing trend of products with tiny text that is too small to read easily. Examples include:
Car infotainment screens
Restaurant menus displayed on high wall mounted TVs
Printed business cards

When these issues are reported, the typical response by trolls, fanboys, shareholders and disgruntled employees of companies that make the affected products is to say that the people reporting the problem need eyeglasses. But is that really the cause of the tiny text problem?

Since the affected products are usually designed on a computer, I would say that it is the graphic designer's own need for glasses that is the cause. For example:

1. A graphic designer sets the display to greater than 100 percent magnification when working on a product, then sets the text to look "normal size" while in the magnified view, and failing to consider that real world users can't enlarge the text at will.

2. A graphic designer who wears Coke bottle glasses (because the lenses are as thick as the bottom of a Coca Cola bottle) sets the text to look "normal size" while wearing Coke bottle glasses, and failing to consider that not all real world users wear Coke bottle glasses.

As a result, text that looks "normal size" to the graphic designer with magnified display and Coke bottle glasses looks painfully tiny to real world users.

The tiny text problem may also be the result of increased remote work, where graphic designers sitting at home in front of a computer screen push out designs without going through real world testing. This should include putting test subjects at the same viewing angle and distance that real customers would experience with car displays, wall mounted TVs, etc. Products should be designed so that people with average vision can easily read the text without need for glasses - and tested on those same people.

 

[eyoungren]

You blame graphic designers, I blame people not following the 'rules'.

I did 19.5 years in the newspaper industry. For classifieds and legals you shouldn't be using anything less than 6pt type. Body copy for a newspaper shouldn't normally be less than 10pts, 8pts for cutlines. Headlines, subheads and pull quotes use much larger font sizes. Mastheads should run around 8-10pts. Ad design, you don't want to go less than 5.5pt and that's usually for the fine print in coupons. Ads and stuff for web demand higher font sizes.

I've been working in the golf industry designing yardage books, scorecards, pin sheets and other materials for over five years now. About the lowest font size we want to go is again 6pt. But there are certain other rules that dictate 9pts being the smallest.

Most of the stuff I do is handled by older, retired people out on a golf course for a bit of fun. Font sizes have to be readable and we're often running at 9-12pts.

For the record, graphic designer of 25 years here. I wear glasses, but they aren't coke bottles and I work from home. Both QuarkXPress and InDesign will tell you what font size you have selected if you bother to pay attention.

 

[Nermal]

It's not just in print/advertising. I had to replace a perfectly good 32" TV with a larger one, because I have a PlayStation and in the past few years a lot of game developers just seemed to assume that everyone has an enormous TV. At first it was one or two games, but now a large number of games have microscopic text that you need a huge TV to be able to read.

 

[eyoungren]

It's not just in print/advertising. I had to replace a perfectly good 32" TV with a larger one, because I have a PlayStation and in the past few years a lot of game developers just seemed to assume that everyone has an enormous TV. At first it was one or two games, but now a large number of games have microscopic text that you need a huge TV to be able to read.

This is exacerbated by the fact that that larger screen sizes all use the same resolution. A few months ago I was looking at TVs while waiting for my car to be fixed. Almost all of the 65-80" TVs on display had the same resolution as my 55" HDTV at home. What happens is simply that the pixel gets bigger the larger the screen.

So, if you're using a certain font size at 3840x2160 resolution it's going to be a bigger or smaller pixel depending on your TV size. And if you're building that on a 75" screen, you drop it on to a 32" screen at the same resolution and now you have mice type.

My assumption (a bad one) was that larger TVs got higher resolution - because that's what happens with monitors for computers right? Sadly, that is not the case and my jones for a larger TV has pretty much been curtailed until manufacturers get around to higher resolutions instead of simply bigger pixels.

 

[Nermal]

Yep, this old cartoon from 2010 is still pretty accurate today:

 

[winxmac]

I guess I'm one of those almost entirely against UI elements getting bigger... Microsoft through Windows 8 started it... Before, you get more information in a compact space... Now, look at YouTube [desktop website] bigger video boxes, lesser videos displayed... And many websites are following the trend or supporting something new for a change...

What designers should do is their UI should adjust depending on the display size... The bigger the display, the more viewable content...

 

[Pakaku]

I guess I'm one of those almost entirely against UI elements getting bigger... Microsoft through Windows 8 started it... Before, you get more information in a compact space... Now, look at YouTube [desktop website] bigger video boxes, lesser videos displayed... And many websites are following the trend or supporting something new for a change...

What designers should do is their UI should adjust depending on the display size... The bigger the display, the more viewable content...

Not just bigger text, but a lot of wasted space because of the touchscreen phenomenon. Buttons that used to be perfectly sized are now five times the size of my cursor…

 

[Nermal]

And they're probably jammed together to "compensate". When copying a file in Windows, the "replace existing" and "skip" buttons have zero pixels of space between them.

 

[Herdfan]

my jones for a larger TV has pretty much been curtailed until manufacturers get around to higher resolutions instead of simply bigger pixels.

You can get an 8KTV.

Problem is there isn't any content to view. And still very little 4K content.

 

[MisterSavage]

Preach. I can't believe this is still an issue in some video games also but thankfully the situation is better.

 

[Riovfo]

So, if you're using a certain font size at 3840x2160 resolution it's going to be a bigger or smaller pixel depending on your TV size. And if you're building that on a 75" screen, you drop it on to a 32" screen at the same resolution and now you have mice type.

Then don’t use the same resolution on your 32”
Go down to 1080p or 720p and it will look just as it did in the good old days

 

[eyoungren]

You can get an 8KTV.

Problem is there isn't any content to view. And still very little 4K content.

Yes to both. But as you said, still very little to no content (for 8k). 8K is still very recent.

 

[eyoungren]

Then don’t use the same resolution on your 32”
Go down to 1080p or 720p and it will look just as it did in the good old days

Yeah, I'm not the one with a 32 inch TV. That'd be @Nermal, whom I was quoting. My TV a 55 inch. I do have two 30" Cinema Displays though. But I'm not using those for games.

 

[MBAir2010]

while a graphic designer for a newspaper the rule of thumb was
"a human face needs to be bigger than a dime" that was minimal.

i can NOT read anything printed on a grocery product label anymore because we are not suppoed to!

 

[mansplains]

As a web designer, who prefers smaller text in general, and just got glasses this past week, this is an interesting post. I don't think the designers you're referring to are visually impaired, but are pushing boundaries in trying to fit as much content as possible. As noted by @eyoungren , these designers likely aren't following rules.

For web accessibility, WCAG doesn't specify a minimum font size, instead emphasizing the importance of text resizability, contrast, and overall readability. Web designers and developers should focus on creating flexible, scalable text that can be easily read and adjusted by users with various visual needs. Most browsers default to a font size equivalent to 16 pixels, so it's generally best practice to use relative units for font sizing.

Another reason against setting a fixed font size is the variation in language and character sets. For example, comparing "Hello" with "مرحبا" highlights how contrast affects legibility more than size.

Even if a designer or developer is ignoring WCAG or other standards, copy and font guidelines may be declared in a style guide created by a client, who may be unaware of accessibility requirements.

You note restaurant menus on screens. I have difficulty reading text at a distance, especially when it's backlit, and have had minor issues with what you describe. My glasses have completely changed this for me, these screens are crystal clear. When looking at the mountains miles away "naked", I can see the landscape. With glasses I can make out individual trees. It's kinda crazy to realize what I've been missing.

While the information I shared won't help with a restaurant menu high up on the wall, I hope you'll understand that there are principles in all areas of design to remedy the problems you bring up.

Products should be designed so that people with average vision can easily read the text without need for glasses - and tested on those same people.

I would say this is mostly correct, but it's essential to also consider and test with users who have various visual impairments and other disabilities. This ensures accessibility and usability for all users.

 

[rm5]

Over the past several years, there has been a growing trend of products with tiny text that is too small to read easily. Examples include:
Car infotainment screens
Restaurant menus displayed on high wall mounted TVs
Printed business cards

When these issues are reported, the typical response by trolls, fanboys, shareholders and disgruntled employees of companies that make the affected products is to say that the people reporting the problem need eyeglasses. But is that really the cause of the tiny text problem?

Since the affected products are usually designed on a computer, I would say that it is the graphic designer's own need for glasses that is the cause. For example:

1. A graphic designer sets the display to greater than 100 percent magnification when working on a product, then sets the text to look "normal size" while in the magnified view, and failing to consider that real world users can't enlarge the text at will.

2. A graphic designer who wears Coke bottle glasses (because the lenses are as thick as the bottom of a Coca Cola bottle) sets the text to look "normal size" while wearing Coke bottle glasses, and failing to consider that not all real world users wear Coke bottle glasses.

As a result, text that looks "normal size" to the graphic designer with magnified display and Coke bottle glasses looks painfully tiny to real world users.

The tiny text problem may also be the result of increased remote work, where graphic designers sitting at home in front of a computer screen push out designs without going through real world testing. This should include putting test subjects at the same viewing angle and distance that real customers would experience with car displays, wall mounted TVs, etc. Products should be designed so that people with average vision can easily read the text without need for glasses - and tested on those same people.

I am not sure what to make of this post. I think I understand your point, but not really sure.

I understand point #1. The people publishing the design, brochure, poster, etc. should make sure it is readable on paper, and at 100% zoom digitally.

I haven't noticed this problem myself, because every design, brochure, poster, etc. I see (whatever might be made by graphic designers) is perfectly readable for me.

Something about this post bothers me immensely though... I had at least five eye surgeries as a child, and I am not convinced that it is purely a problem with people having "average vision." As of right now, with an intense contact lens prescription, I can say I have "average vision." I have noticed it improve significantly over my lifetime. I have no problem reading small text. Rather, if there is a problem - which I am not qualified to answer that question - it is that people are not proofing their designs at 100% zoom. Point #2 really does not sit right with me.

 

[BanjoDudeAhoy]

It's not just in print/advertising. I had to replace a perfectly good 32" TV with a larger one, because I have a PlayStation and in the past few years a lot of game developers just seemed to assume that everyone has an enormous TV. At first it was one or two games, but now a large number of games have microscopic text that you need a huge TV to be able to read.

I still have a 40” 1080p from (just about exactly) 12 years ago. It’s perfectly fine - technically. But like you, I noticed text in games becoming smaller and smaller.
I just can’t really justify throwing out a perfectly working TV.

 

[HDFan]

I just can’t really justify throwing out a perfectly working TV.

The increased quality of a current good monitor isn't of interest? Resolution of small text likely would be massively better, among many other things. When I upgraded from a Cinema 30" display to a iMac Pro display all my reaction was "wow!".

 

[BanjoDudeAhoy]

The increased quality of a current good monitor isn't of interest? Resolution of small text likely would be massively better, among many other things. When I upgraded from a Cinema 30" display to a iMac Pro display all my reaction was "wow!".

I’m talking specifically about a TV in the living room.
For a monitor on my desk, I’d be more willing to upgrade. In that case, I could also keep the old one as a 2nd or 3rd screen or give it to my partner.

But the TV… we don’t need or want it in a different room; I don’t think it would sell anymore, either, so it feels like it would go in the trash and I’m quite averse to just throwing it away when it works fine - except for modern games.

 

[HDFan]

You would see a similar massive improvement in video quality with a current OLED TV, assuming you have good content sources.

 

[eyoungren]

But the TV… we don’t need or want it in a different room; I don’t think it would sell anymore, either, so it feels like it would go in the trash and I’m quite averse to just throwing it away when it works fine - except for modern games.

We have a 42" Plasma TV in our bedroom. I think your TV will sell before ours, unless yours is a plasma.

 

[BanjoDudeAhoy]

We have a 42" Plasma TV in our bedroom. I think your TV will sell before ours, unless yours is a plasma.

Oh! I remember a friend of mine moving abroad and trying to sell his plasma TV. There was indeed not a lot of interest. Not sure what he ended up doing with it 🤔

 

[Cunir]

I was thinking about this the other day when I bought my first AirTag.
The instructions inside the box were too small to read and I had to get my phone out to magnify the text.
Here's a picture of it... notice the huge amount of whitespace around the instructions. That tells you the tiny text must have been a design decision because there was nothing to stop them making it bigger.

 

[eyoungren]

I was thinking about this the other day when I bought my first AirTag.
The instructions inside the box were too small to read and I had to get my phone out to magnify the text.
Here's a picture of it... notice the huge amount of whitespace around the instructions. That tells you the tiny text must have been a design decision because there was nothing to stop them making it bigger.

Apple's always been about white space - or at least since the early 00s.

It's supposed to just work right? No reason to get the customer involved in things like instructions. That'll just confuse them!

 

[Cirillo Gherardo]

Then don’t use the same resolution on your 32”
Go down to 1080p or 720p and it will look just as it did in the good old days

Or don't sit the same distance away from a 32" TV as you would a 65". The optimal viewing distance is completely different.