4 ms·

I'm interested in this. As someone who doesn't pay that much attention to typography (beyond the obvious 'Papyrus is bad' stuff) what makes individual typeface

by jmduke 14y ago

I'm interested in this. As someone who doesn't pay that much attention to typography (beyond the obvious 'Papyrus is bad' stuff) what makes individual typefaces preferable over a standard typeface for all similarly structured content? (Besides branding, that is.)

sbierwagen 14y ago
It's pure marketing. There's no objective, measurable difference.
- LoganCale 14y ago
  Yes there is. Certain typefaces are objectively easier to read than others, and some work better for certain content than others. Some are best for body text, some are best for headlines, etc. Some are optimized for low resolution screens, some for print (and as such work well on high resolution screens).
  - delackner 14y ago
    A great recent example that appeared on HN was the typeface designed for road signs, which the designers then put through Germany(?)'s test suite for legibility at distance in various road conditions and determined the new font was objectively legible at greater distance than all previous standard road-sign fonts with which it was compared. [By request, I found the original article: http://ilovetypography.com/2012/04/19/the-design-of-a-signage-typeface/ http://ilovetypography.com/2012/04/19/the-design-of-a-signag... ]
    - tsahyt 14y ago
      Do you happen to have the link to that? Must have missed that and I'd like to read it.
      - delackner 14y ago
        http://ilovetypography.com/2012/04/19/the-design-of-a-signage-typeface/ http://ilovetypography.com/2012/04/19/the-design-of-a-signag...
- chj 14y ago
  I remember reading a post several days ago, mentioning that particular font face could help a paper score higher.
  - tathagata 14y ago
    This is from very long back. In school, I once passed an exam on grace marks given because of my graceful handwriting (this was writing in the 'Devanagari' script, which even naturally allows for more calligraphy than the Roman script).
niels_olson 14y ago
Edward Tufte's forum has some good discussions on type This one is short http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0000z0 http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0... but see the collection of additional threads at the bottom of that thread.* Also, Bringhurst: http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert-Bringhurst/dp/0881791326 http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert-Brin... ------------------ *I like the "local masters" concept Tufte has (full disclosure, I helped prototype it), and Wikipedia does something similar.
jcampbell1 14y ago
Don't worry about it too much. Most people don't care. I am the kind of guy that walks into the Google offices and immediately thinks "What the fuck is this place, a daycare center?" Most people disagree, and think the Google decor is wonderful. My opinion is likely not mainstream.
printer 14y ago
Every font is designed for a purpose. Serif fonts are designed to help the brain recognize the different letters. Comic Sans was designed to be used informal. Helvetica was designed to be used in signage. Verdana was designed to be readable from (72dpi) computer screens. And so on. So as screen resolutions increase a serif font can help the brain to recognize small letters increasing readability.
- podperson 14y ago
  Serif fonts are designed to emulate Roman inscriptions, which had serifs to help water drain out of them without wearing them out (and thus reducing maintenance costs). The brain stuff is at best speculative and not backed by any data (and in any event is a post hoc rationalization). In general, readability tests (per the original article) have produced equivocal results which seem to show mainly that people prefer the fonts they grew up with.

by jmduke 14y ago

sbierwagen 14y ago

It's pure marketing. There's no objective, measurable difference.

LoganCale 14y ago
Yes there is. Certain typefaces are objectively easier to read than others, and some work better for certain content than others. Some are best for body text, some are best for headlines, etc. Some are optimized for low resolution screens, some for print (and as such work well on high resolution screens).
- delackner 14y ago
  A great recent example that appeared on HN was the typeface designed for road signs, which the designers then put through Germany(?)'s test suite for legibility at distance in various road conditions and determined the new font was objectively legible at greater distance than all previous standard road-sign fonts with which it was compared. [By request, I found the original article: http://ilovetypography.com/2012/04/19/the-design-of-a-signage-typeface/ http://ilovetypography.com/2012/04/19/the-design-of-a-signag... ]
  - tsahyt 14y ago
    Do you happen to have the link to that? Must have missed that and I'd like to read it.
    - delackner 14y ago
      http://ilovetypography.com/2012/04/19/the-design-of-a-signage-typeface/ http://ilovetypography.com/2012/04/19/the-design-of-a-signag...
chj 14y ago
I remember reading a post several days ago, mentioning that particular font face could help a paper score higher.
- tathagata 14y ago
  This is from very long back. In school, I once passed an exam on grace marks given because of my graceful handwriting (this was writing in the 'Devanagari' script, which even naturally allows for more calligraphy than the Roman script).

niels_olson 14y ago

Edward Tufte's forum has some good discussions on type This one is short http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0000z0 http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0... but see the collection of additional threads at the bottom of that thread.* Also, Bringhurst: http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert-Bringhurst/dp/0881791326 http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert-Brin... ------------------ *I like the "local masters" concept Tufte has (full disclosure, I helped prototype it), and Wikipedia does something similar.

jcampbell1 14y ago

Don't worry about it too much. Most people don't care. I am the kind of guy that walks into the Google offices and immediately thinks "What the fuck is this place, a daycare center?" Most people disagree, and think the Google decor is wonderful. My opinion is likely not mainstream.

printer 14y ago

Every font is designed for a purpose. Serif fonts are designed to help the brain recognize the different letters. Comic Sans was designed to be used informal. Helvetica was designed to be used in signage. Verdana was designed to be readable from (72dpi) computer screens. And so on. So as screen resolutions increase a serif font can help the brain to recognize small letters increasing readability.

podperson 14y ago
Serif fonts are designed to emulate Roman inscriptions, which had serifs to help water drain out of them without wearing them out (and thus reducing maintenance costs). The brain stuff is at best speculative and not backed by any data (and in any event is a post hoc rationalization). In general, readability tests (per the original article) have produced equivocal results which seem to show mainly that people prefer the fonts they grew up with.