l factor could be the possible perception that research that is presented in a flashy, colourful way is lacking in substance, that researchers who spend large amounts of time on presentation are compromising the research itself. The traditional presentation of research has been through publication in scientific journals, not renowned for their attention to visual appeal, and the use of extensive visual or multimedia assistance to focus the reader's attention could be viewed as condescending.Furthermore, making use of the available technology, whilst relatively easy using today's advanced, user-friendly development software, is nonetheless far more time-consuming than the use of simple text. In the context of a scientific report, visual cues are far more labour intensive to include than equivalenttextual explanations in most cases. Furthermore many researchers are unfamiliarwith the techniques required to produce them, and more willing to attemptwritten explanations than commission graphic artworks.Many of the technologically maxed-out sites connected to the NaMiST Conference page distract the audience from the information they intend to provide. This is reflected by one group's client requesting a very simple, uncluttered and movement-free page. High-tech pages also take longer to download, and often require plug-ins that may themselves take a lot of time to download. And how often have you waited for a large file to download only to find it has been somehow corrupted and is useless? Perhaps in many fields of scientific research, such material is simply inappropriate. Explaining quantum physics research on any level but the most basic would be extremely difficult to do using graphics and sound....
