Contents Page Evaluation 1

Since my last "contents page" post where i had gotten as far as filling in the titles and adding pictures i have changed quite a lot and added a lot to make the page look more professional, full, and interesting.

This was what my contents page was beginning to look like when i last done an update about it.
This is what it looks like now:

In the corner i added a copy of the front cover, something which is very common in rock music magazines such as Kerrang. I also put the magazine website near the title which is a convention of nearly every magazine. After considering many different styles of layouts and title sytles i thought this one looked the best, the layout is easy on the eye and the audience can easily read it-the subtitles are clear and prominent and the pictures are big enough to attract.

Just like my front page, i think my contents page doesn't really challenge codes and conventions of a music genre contents page. For example i have pictures, titles, page numbers and a copy of the front cover. Though the colours and the amount of text isn't very stereotypical of the magazine sub-genre i chose. Contents pages for magazines such as Kerrang and Rock Sound (popular rock/metal music magazines) are very busy and colourful, with lots of boxes that are made to stand out. Here is an example:


My contents page is much more reserved and simple compared to this, although i am satisfied with the simple approach. I think the colour scheme of my contents is just as effective as everything stands out enough and it runs with the theme of the front page, linking the two together so it is obvious they are part of the same issue. The pictures are all relevant to the titles on the front cover also, showing their importance. The biggest picture on the contents page is the one of Chris Page (the band member on my front cover), this shows it is the main feature.