I have a complaint. Scientific papers can be quite demanding to read. So, why make life more difficult by making the legends of the figures so hard to read? My big complaint is that when a legend pertains to multiple parts, the letters corresponding to them are nearly invisible. Try finding the (c), (d), or (e) in the legend. For heaven’s sake, what is so hard about showing these in bold letters? Besides, life would be simpler if there were fewer images or if they weren’t grouped so tightly.
Next time you write a paper, tell the editor that you want the letters in figure legends to be in bold face. Thank you in the name of all of us.
You are correct in condemning small type in legends and references. Its all about money, I fear and the cost of coated paper. We should insist on concise text making room for bigger type since we cannot stop the scientific world writing papers on everything done in the name of research and thats all about money too because you need a paper trail to get maney to do more. You need to add for some publications (esp. Society quarterlies ,except for Microbe of ASM)the attemt at baeutification wiith colour everywhere over and under type together with patches in different (often small) type sans serif and so on. We ought to complain on asbestos paper.
You wisdom has not abated. Thanks for sharing it.
Posted by: Robert Murray | June 15, 2011 at 06:11 PM