Jason McDermott has an excellent question:SciTweeps - which camp are you in? The A) “poster as a visual aid to a presentation w/minimal text” or B) “poster as a complete manuscript”?
There are some definition issues here. When I hear “manuscript,” I think that implies a journal article. That, to my mind, is way too detailed and too much stuff. A poster is not be a journal article and should not necessarily follow its conventions.
The other part of option B, though, is “complete.” As I’ve said before, a poster should be self-contained. It should present a complete narrative that does not need a speaker to guide you through it or explain it. A poster should be more than just a billboard or decoration; a poster should have substance.
I am intrigued by the responses. Most responses favoured minimalism.
I prefer (A), but there should be enough text for the reader to understand the results without you being there - Kelsey Wood
A, always A - Auriel Fournier
A. Always! That's the difference between a poster and a journal article. Posters are for work in progress. Publish once done - Matthias Lein
The contrary point of view is interesting, though:
I don’t want your song-and-dance routine, I want your data; plus, what if you're not there when I am? - Bill Hooker
90% A, 10% B. (Some things really need text.) - Chemjobber
Depends on venue. If you never leave poster, A. Otherwise, needs enough B for people to critically evaluate. - Peter Thompson
Noah wanted to dig deeper:
Can’t we split the difference? C) "poster as cues to provoke interesting questions, answer boring ones."
And from there the conversation went all Game of Thrones:
We already suffer about as much carnage as G.R.R. Martin’s characters - and about as much job security. - Jason McDermott
“The red conference” - noah
Book 1: “A trial of tenure.” Book 2: “A lack of funding” - Francois Gould
Related posts
Containment
Picture by char booth on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment