Images vs. No Images in Auto Responders

[amo992]

I recently signed up with groupon and noticed that their newsletters included a lot of images, and, more importantly, could not be completely viewed unless I clicked display images.

Personally, I have never tested anything but the usual text with sporadically placed links.

Has anyone tested sending newsletters that are designed with images rather than simple wall of text? Has it helped?

[desertsun1]

They say a picture speeks a thousand words. The problem as I understand it, is that most people are lazy, and they don't want to read. The other problem with autoresponders is if there is alot of graphic material in your message, your ISP may block it as being spam.

[Pusateri]

I get better click through when I use interesting and relevant images.

We are visual creatures. Images are processed and produce a limbic response before we are even consciously aware of what the image is of.

Images can freeze attention for a split second and keep the viewer/reader from clicking away. In that pause some words get noticed, processed and comprehended. If you have done your job as a writer, a spark of interest is created and the brain reads on.

Images also let you use captions and captions are more likely to be read by skimmers. They act as alternative entry points for your copy.

[gottahave]

Images can really increase the size of an email so always take note of the size before sending it out as not everyone on your mailing list will have a hi-speed internet connection.

[amo992]

Originally Posted by Pusateri

I get better click through when I use interesting and relevant images.

We are visual creatures. Images are processed and produce a limbic response before we are even consciously aware of what the image is of.

Images can freeze attention for a split second and keep the viewer/reader from clicking away. In that pause some words get noticed, processed and comprehended. If you have done your job as a writer, a spark of interest is created and the brain reads on.

Images also let you use captions and captions are more likely to be read by skimmers. They act as alternative entry points for your copy.

Is needing to click 'show images' a problem? or do you think people are more likely to click and read on because of curiosity of what the images look like?

[Pusateri]

Originally Posted by amo992

Is needing to click 'show images' a problem? or do you think people are more likely to click and read on because of curiosity of what the images look like?

It's not a problem, at least not with the people on my lists.

Tracking codes are embedded in email as a single pixel image, so the reader has to have images enabled, or click 'show images' for an 'open' to be recorded.

This means that whatever your open rate is, that's how many people actually saw your images, or would have seen them if you had used any.

I primarily use images to create curiosity and it works well in my niche. The links in my newsletters that get the most clicks are at the bottom of the page, while the images are usually closer to the top (the captions beneath them are links, as well).

That makes my think they are reading, but I'm sure some just scroll down to the bottom because that's where they expect to find a link.