The posters make up perhaps the most interesting part of the conference to a non-scientist like me. In theory and because of their nature they should be a little more digestible and succint than the presentations. In theory. Yes, the scientists, research and topics are all incredible, but it was interesting to note that not many of the posters captivated on that intrinsic level that posters are designed to: they should visually engage, be punchy, colourful, strike emotional chords and draw in. They should act as windows to the world of science and not be straight-out, all-encompassing edifices. And they so often are - as if the original research papers themselves have been wallpapered onto the backboard. Scientists should relish the challenge of appealing through a different sort of medium than standing on a stage and delivering speeches.
There were several notable exceptions in my mind. Not all of them I managed to cover, but here are a few examples of the more visually-appealing or interactive ones.
Social-economic drivers in (political) TAC setting decisions, Julia Hoffmann (one of several co-authors)
Industry science: unlocking the real potential of industry data, curiosity and knowledge. Co-author Martin Pastoors.
Field identification guide to benthic invertebrates in West Greenland. Co-author Helle Jørgensbye.
Science-industry partnerships in a high risk, high-technology biotechnology project: developing a vaccine to sterilize farmed salmon. Co-author Dorothy Dankel.
Also a special shout out to John Pope for his uber-communicative methods during the poster session on Wednesday night.