Question: Do you prefer reading online articles with or without pictures?
Hello everyone. Today’s question is a very basic one that can affect your perception of any article you read online. On blogs or other sites, do you prefer reading articles that contain pictures of any kind, or do you prefer text-only articles?
In this article, whenever I refer to a picture, I am referring to pictures that show something from real life, and whenever I refer to an image, I am referring to the concept of images, which includes both pictures from real life and other visual art. Let us assume for this article that we are dealing with a language where the main focus relies on using text as a communication tool, and not images alone, even though text itself is a form of an image we use to come up with different meanings and sounds.
Some people can understand articles better if there is text along with pictures, as those people may either be better at having both pictures and text talk about something, instead of digesting text only. Other people may understand articles better if there is only text, as they may either be better at having text as their only focus about something, or they may have a hard time seeing pictures or may actually not be able to see and thus may be using some software to have their computers read back any online article. In that latter case, any picture description or the explanation of the picture within the html code becomes their text association1.
Articles without pictures
A simple example of an article without a picture is my post “Question: do you like using your real name online?.” Sure, an article may have other pictures like the site name logo on the top of this page, though such pictures may be connected to the site directly and may not necessarily be only applicable or connected to the article in question2.
Some benefits of a writing without pictures include:
- No distraction, resulting in full focus on the text
- Better understanding of what is being said because of being able to imagine things, instead of being biased by what the picture may be showing
- Understood by many people, including those who prefer having pictures
Articles with pictures
A good example of a post that uses pictures would be my recent article titled “10 stereotypical elements to offline unprofessionalism.” That article has pictures to give some brief examples of what I am referring to in different areas3.
Some benefits of a writing with pictures include:
- Better understanding of what one may be referring to, specially when the picture may explain things when the author cannot explain easily through text or when the author wishes to explain more through the pictures
- A pictorial or an extra word association with the writing itself4
- In some cases, a simple visualization of stuff through a specific picture or a group of pictures, as an alternate to reading the entire text
Do you prefer online articles with or without pictures?
As you may have noticed from the above text, having pictures can help or can cause issues in some cases for different people. There is probably no definite answer to whether or not text with pictures is a good thing. So, do you prefer reading articles with or without pictures?
Please let me know what you think. Thank you for reading. I really appreciate it. 
Footnotes
The footnotes allow me to add information and more personal feelings and notes to bottom of articles, questions, poems, and other writings or expressions without disrupting the flow of the main content much. If you have any questions or comments about this footnote or footnotes in general, please contact me. Thank you.
An association with the text can happen in many ways, including using a picture or a set of words or letters. In the concept of association using a set of words or letters, I am referring to cases where a person who may have a hard time seeing may be reading the site through a browser that reads text out loud, and thus that person may associate some group of words with the article in question. For example, the picture of a person with a tattoo on his back, as shown in this paragraph, can become an association for people who can see the picture. For people who may have a hard time seeing for various reasons, I try to make available the “alt” description in the html coding or the very text itself, which in this example says “picture of a male with colorful tattoo on his back“, as an association with the text and article in question. The “alt” text exists to show a text in case the picture does not load. I like to use it so that it can be used to explain pictures to people who cannot see the pictures for other reasons also. I like using the image “alt” text area to explain an image in as much detail as possible so that everyone who comes across the image in almost any manner knows what is going on and can create an association if they wish. Most browsers allow you to hover over the image with your mouse and see what the “alt” text is, if you leave the mouse on the image for a second or two. [↩]- I will cover that topic, of whether or not having any kind of an image on a site means the site has images and is not a text-only site, in the near future. [↩]
- I will cover a related topic, of whether or not having only pictures and no text can be useful, in the near future. [↩]
- An association with the text can happen in many ways, including using a picture or a set of words or letters. In the concept of association using a set of words or letters, I am referring to cases where a person who may have a hard time seeing may be reading the site through a browser that reads text out loud, and thus that person may associate some group of words with the article in question. For example, the picture of a person with a tattoo on his back, as shown in this paragraph, can become an association for people who can see the picture. For people who may have a hard time seeing for various reasons, I try to make available the “alt” description in the html coding or the very text itself, which in this example says “picture of a male with colorful tattoo on his back“, as an association with the text and article in question. The “alt” text exists to show a text in case the picture does not load. I like to use it so that it can be used to explain pictures to people who cannot see the pictures for other reasons also. I like using the image “alt” text area to explain an image in as much detail as possible so that everyone who comes across the image in almost any manner knows what is going on and can create an association if they wish. Most browsers allow you to hover over the image with your mouse and see what the “alt” text is, if you leave the mouse on the image for a second or two. [↩]
( November 11th, 2007 at 6:54 am )
I think pictures help to break up the text, improve layout and therefore readibility, but unless there is a good reason for them not understanding.
Diagrams done well can aid in understanding, and pictures can help to give a sense of place, or scale, but only really when that is necessary. Purely illustrative pictures don’t add much and while I don’t have a problem with them, I tend not to notice them.
( November 11th, 2007 at 1:29 pm )
I have to agree. Good article. Keep it up
( November 12th, 2007 at 12:48 pm )
I’d say pictures make it ‘less boring’..but sometimes you don’t need pictures for it could be a professional paper that makes a point. Hard to say
( November 12th, 2007 at 3:00 pm )
Thats easy, with pictures. As they say a picture is worth a 1000 words.
( November 12th, 2007 at 7:37 pm )
Andrew, thanks for the comment. Breaking up the text does indeed give the entire content a sense of fresh air in many cases.
So in your view, pictures or images should be used only when absolutely necessary, correct?
Charlie, thanks for the nice complement. A question: when you say “agree“, do you mean you prefer images or no images, or something else?
Vera, thanks for the comment too.
“less boring” is indeed a good point: sometimes I will eb reading something thst spans many pages and I notice that having images can respark interest in many cases. What would you prefer to do on your site?
Richard, thanks for the answer also. Do you think articles with non-text pictures are more important or better than articles that have text and no non-text pictures?
( November 12th, 2007 at 11:33 pm )
Bes, I wouldn’t go so far as to say they shouldn’t be used in other circumstances. There is an upside to using them when they add to understanding but I don’t think there is much of a downside to using them if there is not.
( November 13th, 2007 at 9:40 pm )
I prefer pictures if they’ve been taken by the article’s author or are of a personal nature. Not just something someone picked up at some free stock photo site.
imo anyway
( November 14th, 2007 at 8:06 am )
When it comes to reading articles online i think that many people, myself included, have shorter attention spans than, say, if they’re reading a novel. There is so much information that can be easily accessed on the internet that people want to look at something, get the message, and move on to the next article. that being said, i think the length (or brevity) of an article is more important to the readers than whether or not it has pictures. Pictures definitley don’t hurt, but are only a necessity if they are required for the reader to understand the message. all in all, shorter articles are the way to go; people love lists, top 10, top 5 of anything and people will read it.
( November 14th, 2007 at 11:12 am )
I like to see pictures along with the text but only if it is to illustrate what is being said. I can read text-only pages without any problem, but if I wanted to see what was being explained and couldn’t develop my own image, pictures are a plus.
( November 20th, 2007 at 10:57 pm )
I would prefer an image (or a photo, whatever, as long as there is a picture) in a blog post. I believe that images liven up otherwise lengthy posts, which I sometimes stop reading just because it is too long, and I am too impatient to finish it.
But if you have a lengthy post, and you break each part with an image, it makes reading more pleasurable
My two cents!
( November 22nd, 2007 at 1:47 pm )
With pictures. According to me, it’s a better looking and more professional solution.
( December 1st, 2007 at 2:29 pm )
I would certainly say that pictures help, but tooo many spoil the story.
( December 1st, 2007 at 8:50 pm )
I’m a photographer, so I’m kinda forced to use photos to support my words - but I always do my best to keep things organized (and usually use only the bare number of images I have to.
That’s my 2 cents
*shrug*
( December 2nd, 2007 at 11:22 am )
Isn’t it like in a fairytale book? Sometimes it is easier to understand a story, when there is a picture. I think that a article whit a picture ( not a Image ) is more useful than without a picture.
( December 5th, 2007 at 6:11 am )
Yes i like picture , but too much picture is boring. it make bad impression.
( December 11th, 2007 at 10:25 am )
Come on now Earn Money, you can nver have to many pictures
The more the better.
( December 11th, 2007 at 11:03 am )
I have seen another use for images over the past month or so which I thought I would raise. http://wpcandy.com/ uses large images to title and summarise the post. This is really interesting as it makes every post really stand out in the feed reader.
( December 26th, 2007 at 11:30 am )
Its really what your web visitors like that matters.
A web statistics software will tell you what your visitors are doing once they land on your pages.
Make a “B” version of your main webpage and add pictures to it that you think visitors could like.
Now go to crazyeggdotcom and get the free tracking code and insert it on both your webpage and the “B” one. This tracking shows you a snapshot of your website and a heta map showing where people are clicking when they’re on either of your tthat shows you all the clicks and page visits your two pages.
If after a coupe of days the pictures in your pages are getting clicks it likely means its helping your pages. By experimenting a little with different pictures and insertion places, you can find the right balance between text and images on your pages.
( December 28th, 2007 at 3:33 pm )
I prefer articles with images, personally. For several reasons … most people have a natural ability to learn visually. Charts and other illustrations make sense to most people in ways that text never will. An example: studies have shown about a ten second working memory; to be fully understood you need to write out your thoughts in small chunks that can fit entirely within a person’s short-term memory. If an image is truly worth a thousand words, you can literally communicate bigger, more complex thoughts.
You have a good point about focus on the text … that actually goes both ways. I generally try to write out the text for an article before I add any of the images for this reason.
( December 30th, 2007 at 7:09 am )
RE: Well, initially, I was going to incorporate pictures with my blog, but I guess I didn’t do that lol..more focus on text instead.. probably too boring :P.. because if you put a picture, that usually grabs your readers’ attention first XD then they want to read more XD
( January 2nd, 2008 at 9:01 pm )
I think pictures can be visually stimulating. You are most likely to capture attention if your articles have images or pictures that relates to the content. But then again, its case to case basis, some people love reading without any pictures on the articles. Very nice article.
( January 3rd, 2008 at 6:58 pm )
I like a combination, but for the most part I like to just read. Sometimes pictures can be distracting and unless they really add to the content’s message I don’t love them.
( January 4th, 2008 at 6:30 pm )
I think most people prefer it without too many pics..because of the bandwidth..In countries like India,the bandwidht is not that good..so it is better to put pics in only appropriate places
( January 7th, 2008 at 12:24 pm )
Definitely need pics. The text needs to be above the fold, though.
( January 9th, 2008 at 6:45 am )
Pics can make or break an article.
( January 11th, 2008 at 8:00 am )
Although pics are interseting, in our industry, I think pics are unimportant.
( January 13th, 2008 at 1:26 am )
True, actual visualization makes me understand the article more as long as its relevant. Nice blog.
( January 18th, 2008 at 11:12 am )
Text is great, but sometimes the pictures help clarify what is being said. The problem some people run into is that they put in too many pictures.
The file size of the pictures should not be too large to make the pages load quicker, especially if you are looking at them from a mobile phone.
( January 21st, 2008 at 9:58 pm )
I think it all depends on what topic is actually being written about. I do a lot of article writing myself, and rarely include a picture however I review mostly software, hardware, and general products, so this is not a great example. Most of the time I think about the reader, will they need to know what a wireless device looks like…or would they already know? If I answer, probably, then I don’t include it, no real need. But if I’m reviewing something new, or not readily available through some sort of image search, I will consider including it.
When writing an article on Rosetta Stone Software, I also did a lot of research on the history of the original. I felt I should include a picture of it, and I also came across a very obscure picture of the Rosetta Stone in its “complete” form, not readily available. I ended up including that as well, as well as one of it on display in the British Museum, but I kept the images pretty small so as to not distract from the actual article itself.
But if I was writing an article on Photography, and was giving examples on say, the beauty of black and white images over color images…I would feel obligated to include a photo in both styles to give an example.
It’s all in the topic and looking at it from the readers point of view.
( January 22nd, 2008 at 9:32 am )
I agree that articles w/ pictures appear much more professional than articles that are just plain text. However from a logical standpoint if the reader is interested in the article, they will probably read it no matter if it has pictures or not.
( January 22nd, 2008 at 11:15 am )
Pictures, well placed relevant, can add a lot of flavor if they are done in moderation. It also depends on the type of publication you’re dealing with. Scientific journals have way fewer pictures than magazines, for example.
( February 1st, 2008 at 10:12 am )
Sometimes pictures can be distracting if ther are too many of them. But all text is boring so I like a combo.
( February 3rd, 2008 at 4:58 am )
It depends if pictures are used to make what the author is trying to say clearer or if they are relevant etc.
( February 3rd, 2008 at 1:34 pm )
It all depends on the article in question. But for the most part, I prefer an image to be somewhere on the page… but that’s just me!
( February 4th, 2008 at 9:49 pm )
[Sorry for the late reply everyone.]
Andrew, thanks for the follow up. That is a good way to look at it: pictures don’t always add the benefit, and not using pictures can also do wonders.
Regarding your second comment, those images do indeed stand out and help convey the message well. I am guessing since the entire theme revolves around many thins including themes, showing the readers exactly what is being discussed and read can help convey what the text is trying to say. I wonder how the feeds are being treated by those who cannot see the images perfectly or even at all.
Valerie, thanks for sharing too.
That makes sense also; having personal pictures can describe the author a bit more compared to pictures taken from other places. In your view, do you think paid stock photo sites can add more value than free stock photo sites?
Gorilla Trades, thanks for replying. The length of an article is a very important thing to consider when it comes to realizing whether or not one can hold the attention of many different groups of people. Lists are a favorite of many people, and so are shorter articles as you mentioned. I wonder if pictures can be an overkill in many different kinds of articles, meaning that they will do more harm than good to the article’s message even if the pictures themselves are good.
Morgan, thanks for coming and commenting. Are there any specific types of topics that you would like to see elaborated with pictures?
Congrats on the new blog, btw.
pelf, thanks for the comment too. Lengthy posts do indeed regrab attention with posts for many people. In your view, if a post is really long, will you keep reading it solely because of interesting pictures associated with the reading?
Dividing long posts with images can indeed be interesting. I am trying something similar these days with the “getting a ride from Bes guide series.”
Fab, thanks for sharing. So for you, pictures make things better and more professional. In your view, are photoblogs more professional than normal, text-driven blogs?
Perros, thanks for sharing. Do you mean that pictures can give away the story, or that they can distract the person and take their focus away from the text?
Taylor Jackson, thanks for sharing. Do you ever get clients who ask you to represent each picture with some kind of a good written title or caption also? Do you prefer a picture doing its own talking?
You take very good pictures, by the way.
Bernd, thanks for the comment. It is indeed like a fairytale. Sometimes the pictures grab us, sometimes they don’t. So I think in your view, pictures help an article become better, I see. Would you stop or start reading a blog on a regular basis, if the author in question gave up or started using pictures in her/his articles?
Earn money, thanks for sharing. So in your view, if I am not mistaken, too many pictures can hurt an article. Do you think there are any exceptions when an article can have many pictures and still avoid being boring?
Dallas MLS, thanks for commenting and interacting. So in your view, more pictures are better, correct?
I have a question for you, opposite to what I asked “Earn money” above: in your view, can there ever be a situation where have many pictures or even any pictures can be less powerful than having no pictures? Also, what is your view of having pictures without any text?
Florida SEO Company, thanks for the comment. Experimenting is a very good thing, and what you mentioned many be able to help many people in different situations figure out what the readers are clicking. I have a question: crazyeffdotcom measures clicks only, right?
Forrest, thanks for the comment.
Many people do indeed learn better with pictures because they prefer pictures with what they are trying to learn. The ten-second theory is very interesting, and can help a lot in conveying messages more effectively. It then becomes a talent to write lengthy articles and still be able to convey messages or grab attention from time to time.
I also think for this site finding out the text inside my is better than finding pictures first unless the text revolves around the picture or pictures I am focusing on.
Hola Vera, thanks for commenting.
You can still incorporate pictures, even though your text/writing is already good. Pictures can indeed grab many users, though not all users. Maybe you should try it? :p
Aurelius Tjin, thanks for commenting and for thinking that the article is nice. So, do you prefer pictures to picture-free articles? Going deeper, do you prefer personal pictures catered specifically to the article at hand or can general pictures do the trick also?
Colorado Lasik Surgery, thanks for the comment. So you prefer reading to picture-reading, though you like both, correct? While pictures can help, for many people they can be distracting and may take the attention away from what a text tries to build up through all the words.
Motivator, thanks for commenting too. Technical aspect of the issue and usability is extremely important, and thanks for bringing it up again too. Because of bandwidth usage, many people may be used to articles without images, or they may actually be disadvantaged when they are being given pictures along with text. Pictures should not be overdone in many cases just like text, as overdoing either one can result in the message getting confused.
Interesting nickname, by the way.
Ferris Bueller, thanks for sharing. So, you prefer text to be presented first and then the pictures?
Turn xp to vista, thanks for the comment. A very interesting nickname you have too. What do you think of articles without pictures? Can they be as good as articles with pictures on the same topic?
Appraisal Blog, thanks for the comment. May I ask if you meant the blogging industry or the appraisal industry, when you said “our industry“?
meg, thanks for the comment too, and thanks for liking it. So in your view, visualizing an article helps make it clearer as long as the visualization explains the topic at hand directly?
Sam Carrara, thanks for the comment. So for you, both bandwidth and the number of pictures can affect a user and the article’s effectiveness, correct? Considering mobile phones is important too since we are slowly starting to get more and more mobile phone users. I myself have been visiting many sites recently from my phone more than my computer. Do you think bloggers should focus on what kind of computers and bandwidth users are using, or should bloggers only focus on their message and the associated text and pictures?
Rosetta Stone, thanks for the comment. As a writer, you also focus on whether or not large or more pictures would affect the browsing and reading experience of a reader, correct?
Your example about Rosetta Stone and its picture being in the British Museum: was it a software picture? I have another question, one that relates to Rosetta Stone itself: do you think learning a language is better through images and text, or better through text only?
Thanks for sharing.
Josh Article, thanks for sharing. So in your view, pictures make an article more professional, right? I like your mention of the interest level of a reader: if a reader is interested, they will focus on the message and probably not on the entire presentation quality or type of the message.
Jmunk, thanks for the comment. For you, the number of pictures plays an important role, right? When you say “publication“, are you also referring to topics? For example, should all journals have fewer pictures, or should journals related to animals or something else have more pictures than journals related to philosophy, which is stereotypically not associated with pictures that much?
Identity Theft, thanks for the comment. So, you do not prefer any text that does not have pictures, regardless of its topic?
A very interesting nickname also, by the way: this one may and can be stolen by others. :p
Miley Syrus, thanks for the comment. It seems more and more people are coming up with very interesting nicknames. So for you, it is a very simple matter when it comes to pictures: whether or not the pictures are relevant to the content, correct?
Off-topic question: how did you come up with your icon?
Gojo, thanks for the comment.
So you prefer at least 1 image somewhere. Does it have to be related to the article, or should it be there just to spice things up?
Thanks again everything for sharing and commenting, and for sharing your examples. I really appreciate it.
( February 23rd, 2008 at 8:13 am )
I always like some pictures. Pictures help to break up the text and make it more interesting…especially if you can find entertaining pictures
( March 1st, 2008 at 9:22 pm )
I prefer reading articles that have some type of images, which are related to the article, as they help break up the text and can sometime give you a better understanding of what you are actually reading. Especially articles that require a higher level of conceptial understanding.
-Jon
( March 4th, 2008 at 12:23 am )
iy is nice reading your article,it is quite interesting to me. But for me it is not important to me whether the article is with or wihtout pictures but what is important to me is the content of that article and how it is beneficial to me…. hehehehe
( March 18th, 2008 at 8:20 am )
as i see it pictures can help to understand the writhing more easy. Same for videos & casts.
In addition i can agree to Miley Cyrus.
( March 30th, 2008 at 2:53 pm )
With pictures. According to me, it’s a better looking and more professional solution.
( March 30th, 2008 at 10:44 pm )
I appreciate an article with pictures, if the pictures are relevant or convey additional information.
( March 31st, 2008 at 6:40 am )
No matter how interesting a post can be, a few good and related pictures will make a difference in improving the readability and understanding of the post.
Or at least, it does for me
( April 7th, 2008 at 11:36 pm )
Good pictures are a must for everything longer than 200 words or so. Otherwise i just get bored. What i really like to see though are graphics and diagrams. I often completely forget about the text, while trying to decipher those
( April 19th, 2008 at 11:13 am )
I agree with andrew. Plus, I’m more of the visual type of person and if I see a long line of text, I just get too lazy reading it. I think a picture helps rest the eyes or something.
( June 3rd, 2008 at 9:52 am )
My comfort zone when it comes to reading online articles is without pictures nor images…just plain text. Pictures just tend to distract my focus and reading flow which leads to less precise reading comprehension thereby making me go over the articles more.
However, every individual has his or her own unique way of reading comprehension. What works for me may not work for the others.
( June 4th, 2008 at 1:44 am )
I would definitely prefer to read articles with pictures. It is more likely to attract my attention.
( June 19th, 2008 at 3:50 pm )
Images help attract me to an article. It’s not as important of a factor to me as an articles Headline, but it’s second tier after that. It’s almost as if you can tell that the author has put alot of effort into the article by spending the time to place an image in it. But the image has to be relevant and intriguing. It can’t just be some junky image.
( July 6th, 2008 at 8:42 pm )
I have always preferred articles with pictures versus not having pictures. This is because I am a visual learner, and pictures make things much easier to comprehend.
( July 27th, 2008 at 9:42 am )
I think for a blog, having pictures usually gets you more readers. Without pictures a blog looks kind of empty and barren. Pictures are always a nice addition to an article. Now that I’ve been blogging for several months, I feel like I need to add a picture to every blog post, otherwise it won’t look very good. Having picture after picture and then no picture does not look so good.