NAC2016 poster prize

Congratulations to the poster prize winners:
Overall winner: Fran├žois Mernier (SRON/Leiden Observatory)
Runner up (Science): Laura Ootes (API)
Runner up (Design): Emiel Por (Leiden Observatory)

 

 

 

Poster prize criteria

Here we provide the judgment critera that were used for this year's poster prize. Read through them carefully, and you may just win the prize next year! The presentation that was used at the awards ceremony is available for download here (57MB).

 

Design

Provide information about the author and the work presented

  • Inclusion of the standard means of communication with the author (email, personal/insitutional web page link). QR codes with links to additional material not presented in the poster are also a bonus.
  • Photo of the author to assist readers to connect the work presented with a face, and make easier for them to find the author for discussion.
  • Basic list of references to assist the reader get more information about the work presented.

Logical flow
The pieces of text must be clearly connected to assist the reader in reading them with the intended order. This can be done with numbers, arrows, etc. The flow of the text in the poster must be natural to the reader (never create the question "Where should I look next?").

 

Use of colour
Balanced use of colour, so to highlight the design of the poster, but not distract the reader or make it overburdened and tiring to read.

 

Use of graphics
A good balance of key plots and cartoons which will provide the most critical information of the work presented. These must be clear and easy to being understood by people working on other fields. A lot of plots can be distracting to the reader, as well as few plots which include too much information!

 

Eye catching?
A nice design or a clever presentation idea will potentially make a poster memorable for a long time. So be creative, but not on the expense of science! A very nice design will never compensate the lack of actual results or work!

 

Readability
The amount of the text, along with the font/font size used are critical. Too much text will discourage the reader to go through all of it, as well as text which is difficult to read.

 

 

Science

Context/Background

  • It must provide the absolutely minimum essential background in order for the work to be understood by a broader audience.
  • Clearly state what is the motivation behind this work, and which is the main question that this work addresses.

 

Methodology
Clearly explain what they did in order to answer the question they have set. Not much detail, but outline concisely the whole process so that the reader can get an idea on how the mentioned problem was attacked. In case of instrumentation posters, there must be a clear description of the instrument's capabilities and technical specifications. Also it is nice to include a brief comparison to other work performed on teh same topic.

 

Relevant graphics
The main message of the poster must be communicated in concise, easy to understand plots, which include the most important information necessary to the reader to understand the improvement that your work is bringing to the field.

 

Conclusion
The author must provide a clear, "take-home" message to the reader. This must follow naturally the poster's content, and point out what is new in this work.

 

Quality
The poster must communicate to the reader what is the impact of the present work to the field

 

Appropriate use of equations/jargon/acronyms with explanation, and in moderation!

 

Bonus

Copies of the paper/poster, so that the reader can pick up a copy and have a further, more careful look later.