Sharing how we can communicate our science effectively, whether in posters, papers or on social media!
Share
SciCom – Are There Design Shortcuts?
Published 23 days ago • 5 min read
Shortcuts & Designing Yourself
Hi Reader, is there a shortcut to designing scientific graphics?
Being creative like the creators of these posters is one. But let’s be honest: creating good visuals can be time-consuming and difficult.
However, scientists are sometimes asked to design journal covers, graphical abstracts, or summary graphics for broad communication.
So, let’s discuss what could make your life easier:
It's Your Decision
No matter the path you decide on, the responsibility will fall to you.
You will have to decide which information and key elements will be included in your graphics.
Good designs are often simple - remember that being serious about prioritization and leaving things out can be necessary for visual clarity, but also to create a bit of curiosity for the reader.(Layouts like the one for the graphical abstract really live from deciding what to (not) display.)
That also means you are responsible for reading the guidelines of the journal or outlet where you will publish.
It may seem trivial, but there is crucial information to know. For graphical abstracts, for example, they might tell you not to display original data.
Here are the Cell Press guidelines, which provide a rather pragmatic outline. However, they contrast with the design principles for graphical abstracts published in The Lancet that contain actual data for example. Therefore, make sure to read them carefully.
Similarly, several outlets advise against including more speculative aspects of your work in visual summaries.
When to Design Yourself
Designing your own graphics comes with three distinct advantages:
It can be a fun variation in your workday that lets you express your creative side.
It often teaches you important aspects of how to frame your work.
It prepares you for situations where you need to design things yourself (think changing labs where there is no support or certain industry positions).
Importantly, even when you hire a designer, they will often ask you for basic guidance.
Knowing how to decide what to portray and understanding general layout principles will go a long way.
Simple but good-looking. I like both of these abstracts (on the left and on the right) because they clearly communicate the core message. While the color palette is subjective, all the basics - layout, color use, and unified design - are well realized. And all of that could be done in PowerPoint (obviously, apart from the molecular simulation). In general, there is no single straightforward way to create good visuals, and you will have to go through many iterations. Often, it is enough to convey the main implication of your idea.
However, there are two extremes in which you should refrain from designing yourself:
First, if you really don’t have time (or motivation) and would therefore rush the process.
Simply depicting a molecule or adding a random icon just to submit something will hurt the perception of your work. Picture: Bad graphical abstract.
Let’s be honest: neither the graphical abstract on the left nor the one on the right does much to make your work attractive or to make your findings clear. To be quite frank, the temptation to just hand something in is common because graphical abstracts have never fully taken off - probably because many scientists struggle to design them, which makes them less impactful overall.
Also, if you have big expectations, you should rethink whether you have the necessary experience.
Big goals come with a big time commitment. Unfortunately, nobody becomes an artist overnight.
Yes, I advise getting inspired by great visuals in your field - but having an idea of what looks good and actually doing it are two very different things.
Is this a good graphical abstract? Well, it is clear, and the design is not obnoxious. With a little more design work, it could be outstanding—but remember, it takes a lot of time to refine it. I think this is the point where you need to decide whether you want to invest that time or not.
The issue is that emotional frustration is exhausting and often leads you to invest unreasonable amounts of time without making real progress.
If you design things yourself, be aware of the investment required. Either commit to developing a valuable new skill, or focus on the basics (visual clarity, unified design, and proper highlighting) and stop when it is good enough.
Choosing the Right Software
Your success will also depend on choosing the right software.
However, learning a new tool from scratch can take more time than you might expect. So what about PowerPoint?
Honestly, I may be one of its biggest proponents.
I even created motion graphics in PowerPoint to explain statistics - you can watch the video here.
However, designing complex shapes or icons is not feasible at all.
In other words, unless you already have all graphical elements prepared and just need the layout, don’t use it.
As an alternative, consider easy-to-use tools such as BioRender or Mind the Graph.
BioRender allows you to highlight, for example, a tumor site or a specific organ in a mouse while making other anatomical features transparent to improve contrast.
It seems like a shortcut, but don’t think you are lazy—it’s simply the better choice for clear visuals.
The point is that these tools are tailored to your use case.
They often provide graphics that are already aligned and look professional and consistent.
Moreover, they typically offer helpful nudges for color and shape choices that support your design. If you combine that with what you have learned in this series, you can achieve very good-looking results.
Hiring a Designer
It can be a good shortcut to hire a designer although it depends on the field how common it is.
Yes, it costs money but it can be worth it. It will save you (or your PhD student/postdoc) a great deal of time.
This is a summary graphic developed by J. Spahr - she has a portfolio of diverse biology-related projects (check it out or book her here). If you are interested in learning more about her, her work or even becoming a scientific designer yourself, check out our Science Career Path Webinar that featured her.
Moreover, you will end up with a sophisticated piece of visual communication that can significantly strengthen your message.
Your work will look more professional, and including such graphics in documents like grant proposals can make a strong impression.
There are several agencies that can help you design your work - Science Graphic Design on the left and SayoStudio on the right. Of course, a quick LinkedIn search will also provide you with several professional freelancers. My tip: check their portfolios to see whether their style fits your needs (differences are significant, to say the least). Finding the right partner is not always easy, but referrals from someone in the field usually help.
What About Freelancers?
There are cheaper options, and platforms such as Fiverr can be a great opportunity.
However, here you must often be very precise about what you want. Moreover, it is not always clear whether the person you hire has the necessary skills and field experience.
Platforms such as Fiverr are the Amazon of services; you will find a broad range of designers even with a small budget.
I can only advise planning enough time, as not everyone is reliable…
Another caveat is that if the result looks only okay—but not great—it can be difficult for you to improve it afterward.
In short, it is more of a gamble: if you have some money to spare, you might hit the jackpot—but have a backup plan if you don’t.
Your Takeaway
Designing things yourself can be fun and teach you valuable skills. However, it takes time to learn and execute well. Time should be your main consideration.
If you are new, use supportive software that fits your purpose.
If professional-level graphics would significantly benefit your career, consider hiring a designer. It may feel unusual at first, but it can take your communication much further.
What Makes a Journal? Hi Reader, how many active, peer-reviewed academic journals exist today? There are 40,000! And are you interested in how many papers they publish every day? So, how can you know which journal to publish in? Today, we will discuss five key features of journals to help you differentiate them: What Differentiates Journals With so many journals available, it is easy to think that they differ only by name or impact factor. Click to enlarge. Please take these numbers with a...
Discussing Publication Metrics Hi Reader, I am sure you are aware of the rising pressure to publish papers. An inappropriate use of metrics used to assess publishing success might contribute to a misguided focus within the scientific community. Let’s discuss some important nuances of the metrics we introduced last time to help you develop your own perspective. Let's get started because there are many angles we have to cover: Do Publication Metrics Make Sense? There is no final answer to that...
Essential Publication Metrics Hi Reader, we commonly communicate our science by publishing it. But to know where to publish, we often look at the impact factor of a journal. Also, whether you get a good postdoc position or become a professor partially depends on your publication record or h-index. Still, what are these metrics, and what do they measure? How Do We Measure Reach? In the past few years, publication pressure has significantly shaped science. Nature & IUBMB Life: Publishers like...