So this one time..

I went to the zoo and The Boyfriend didn't know what a red panda was, so when he saw a picture of it, he called it a koala-fox. Let me tell you, it looks NOTHING like a koala, and maybe a little like a fox. After this trip, it's his new favorite animal.

LOOK AT HIS FACE :D


So here's this article about pictures that I'm pretty sure everyone already knew. But! It's always nice to have numbers and research behind it.

Also, this says words look better with an actual picture, as opposed to a blank screen or a solid color. Apparently, the picture doesn't even have to be relevant! Now, I don't like that, because if there's a disconnect, I just sit there staring in a confused manner and wonder why the heck this doesn't click, why you're trying to persuade me to buy a brand of cracker with a picture of a dolphin.

Just came up with that, I'm not calling anyone out here.

Here's my singular problem with this article: Isn't this kind of a duh thing? As with all the neuromarketing articles, it's nice to have the numbers behind it and the proof and to learn how they got there. But at the end, when they some it up: Make the picture relevant, include a picture, and not just stock photo. Isn't that all given?

This sort of ties in with my post on creativity - BE CREATIVE. Someone took a great picture of a sunset, and it's applicable to your product. DON'T USE IT!! It's probably all over the internet!!! Use it as inspiration and go take your own picture of a sunset! Take a thousand pictures of sunsets if it means you'll get a good shot.

Don't use this. It's from wikipedia. I googled 'sunset.'

But now I've seen what I want, I can go find a nice spot and stare at a sunset until I get a good blend of colors like this for my product.

Don't use stock, everyone will know.


Until next time!
-MG