Melissa Denby

Good Example:

http://img.scoop.it/uEF_y_qS21o2Hmq0BnXqXDl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9

This is an example from Discovery for Kids online. I read the Discovery magazine and thought they would be a good science/technical resource. This example is very straight forward and easy to understand (aside from it being for kids). This shows a simple Ven diagram that is color coded State, Local, and Federal--though the colors could be eliminated and still be read. I like the icons in each section that help the reader both understand and easily hone in on areas of interest. This fits with the Botanical Tree by having three main nodes with smaller more detailed nodes for each area the government is responsible for maintaining.

Bad Example One:

http://artwardbound-gd.tumblr.com/post/28122784036/ny-times-basketball-infographic

This is a NY Times basketball infographic comparing LeBron James and Kevin Durant. I find this to be pretty, but confusing. I don't really need their faces at the bottom to understand the information but they occupy a large section of the infographic. The most helpful information is just written, telling us total shots, points, and percentage for each team and player. The graphic is not immediately understandable. It shows LeBron and Wade, Durant and Harden...and the yellow, green, light green, is that to say they scored sometimes? I understand that Red means frequent scoring in that zone, but how frequent? And why compare individual players, but include two players' scoring for the heat map?

Bad Example Two:

https://biocreativity.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/screen-shot-2012-06-04-at-12-24-34-pm.png

This graphic is amazing at first glance, but has a lot of flaws once you examine it. Why are we only looking at birds, mammals, and amphibians? Once again the most helpful information is in the text...though even that is somewhat confusing. The data may not be normalized, it's confusing that "85% of known species that have been assessed" which is 3,448 of non-threatened...are the percentages based on the total number of mammals assessed--meaning that 15% of mammals have been left out? While they know about 99% of birds? Plus, just visually looking at it, makes me want to count the red creatures because the birds and mammals are close together (visually). I assume they have a message based on the title of the infographic, but the data/visual are hard to interpret.

Botanical Tree: This graphic is hard to understand. Even after reading the article, there needs to be a key of some sort to interpret all the numerous things going on. The size, height, color are a lot to keep in your mind at one time to understand this tree.