Re: Font Peeves

["Martin, Chuck" <chuckm -at- EVOLVESOFTWARE -dot- COM>]

On Friday, January 23, 1998 11:31 AM, Barry House
[SMTP:bhouse -at- CREATIVE-HOUSE -dot- COM] wrote:
> Chuck Martin wrote:
>
> >Times (and its related ilk): whoever thought of using a font designed
to
> >withstand the rigors of high-speed printing on poor quality paper and
> >still be readable while taking up minimal space for top-quality
business
> >correspondence ought to be sentenced to forever reading every
document
> >they ever see in 6-point Times.
> >
>
> I learn something every day I read this list. If Times is a bad font
for
> business correspondence, what's a preferred font?
>
> What about body copy for a manual--what fonts are preferred there?
>
Different places choose many different fonts for many different reasons.
However, because of what Times (and its relations) were designed for, I
don't think it has the highest readability in high-quality printing, nor
is it easily seen on 72 dpi computer screens.

One of the best books I've seen about fonts is called "Stop Stealing
Sheep." (I loaned it out or I could give you the author and ISBN #.)

What I look for in a good body font:

*       decent x-height
*       non-narrow lettering
*       not too decorative
*       rounder bowls
*       moderate serifs, but not square ones

I try to avoid some of the older styles, such as Bookman and Century
Schoolbook. A lot of people like Garamond. One of my favorite fonts in
one I found called Caslon 540.

Different fonts can communicate in different ways.

--
"You don't look American."
"Everyone looks American, because Americans are from everywhere."

- Doonesbury
Chuck Martin, Technical Writer
Evolve Software                  | Personal
chuckm -at- evolvesoftware -dot- com        | writer -at- grin -dot- net
www.evolvesoftware.com           | www.grin.net/~writer