The paper reports an evaluation of digital, split-site and traditional poster presentations at the Association for Medical Education in Europe (AMEE) conference in September 2004. The programme included 300 posters in 19 sessions, viewed, potentially, by 1265 conference participants, in parallel with other events. The instrument was a questionnaire of 16 open- and closed-format questions applied opportunistically and gaining 250 complete responses. Qualitative and quantitative analysis suggested that no one format was preferred. Each had different strengths and weaknesses relating to seeing and hearing the presenter and viewing the poster. Opportunities for discussion were highly valued.