Best-looking newspapers?

My favorite, too. It's dignified and professional while still taking some chances. I used to like Columbia for the same reason, but they've added too much clutter on A-1. It's still a good-looking paper, just doesn't delight me anymore. Boston Globe, New York Times, Portland, Ore. San Diego looks great; Savannah sometimes, too, but both disappoint on content. Hartford and New London -- really like New London a lot, almost a Palm Beach look. I've liked Harrisburg most times I've seen it, color throughout. Lynchburg. Richmond sometimes. Used to love Glens Falls, but they've looked like they slipped a bit last I saw. Arizona Daily Star.

 

Loving this thread. The rare thread on here that isn't depressing or cynical or both.

Thanks

Carry on.

 

Chiaramonte, and yeah, I looked up the spelling to make sure. Still have some of his NHL playoff stuff from two years ago, even though my Habs were long since on the golf course. Some Bills fans got bitchy when he decided to go with an opposing-team theme for most of the gameday sections last season -- "OUR players should be on the front page" -- but they looked great to me.

From this Q-and-A, his list:
"Each of these papers consistently set a high standard for design and/or photography: The Boston Globe, Columbus Dispatch, Plain Dealer, San Jose Mercury News, New York Times and Los Angeles Times."

 

Like the Pilot's originality and cleanliness. I've also seen some good stuff from the Lewiston (ME) Sun Journal. I love their flag with the sunset. Bluffton Today also does a very good job from front to back, especially considering its size.

I understand it's not everybody's cup of tea, but when used well, Bakersfield's setup allows for some of the highest-impact, most dynamic, and most eye-catching design I've seen anywhere in newspapers. The design isn't what people have come to expect from newspapers, and I say that in a good way. Yes, the setup also opens the door for some days when their front just blinds you, but on many other days, it actually makes you think there's something interesting in the paper, unlike 95% of newspapers in this country. It also looks on a daily basis like somebody actually put forth effort into designing the front rather than dragging out a template and filling in the blanks. Sometimes the effort goes awry, but the result turns out good at least as often as it is bad.

 

I randomly chose this page, nothing against the actual designer who did it because it's a template.

But this is just not good. Not in my world.

 

Bakersfield could come up with some awesome custom ransom notes.

 

Shaded box hell

 

It's the shaded boxes. It's the weird upper-left-corner overlap thing. It's the too-little copy in the bottom right corner. It's the skyboxes yelling at me.

It just doesn't work for me.

 

The overlap thing has potential. No way I have it in that crazy L shape. But I'd look at that idea and play with it. The shaded boxes go straight to the trash. The text issue in the bottom right...I hope their template does not mandate a story box that size...

 

Really? I see both on a regular basis, and neither strike me as stellar. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on what makes New London stand out. (Don't get me wrong, it's a great paper, but the design doesn't do a lot for me.)

The sports tab looks really major-league. A great paper throughout.

 

the kc star has a great sports section (although i believe tulsa produces one of the best regional sections in the country) but to say the star looks good, is, well, nuts.

 

The sports tab looks really major-league. A great paper throughout.
[/quote]

Yeah, um, it is great throughout. All but that little part called the columns and stories.