[Hidden-tech] Dearest font geeks,

[eac2222 at gmail.com]

>Any thoughts as to which fonts are better on the eye BOTH in person 
>and via computer is much appreciated.
>
>Kirsten Bonanza


You're right, some fonts that look great on paper don't look so good 
on the screen, and vice versa.

The biggest reason for this is resolution -- the pixels on any screen 
are much bigger than the units of ink (or toner) being put down by 
printing, even lousy printing.  So fine details can get lost on 
screen, or muddy things up.  And some fonts are built *only* for 
on-screen use, but your printer or output shop should flag that sort 
of mistake.

Screen vs paper has other differences, too -- paper reflects light, 
screens emit light, and so on -- but they affect choices like color, 
contrast, and size more than type choice.

Going back a step, what sort of game is this?  Must your screen and 
hardcopy look the same?  It's a real challenge doing design that will 
look good in both.

Back to the fonts, some fonts have been designed expressly to look 
good on screen.  The two gold standards are
    Verdana -- sans serif
    Georgia -- serif
Avenir looks good on paper and screen, as do various weights and 
widths of the Univers family.  So can Helvetica, even if that's not a 
face I personally like.

The Linotype site has a section of fonts which they recommend for 
screen use, so may other type foundries.

Finally, make sure to try out your designs on a variety of people and 
platforms.  Does it show up on their device the way it looks on 
yours?  Big screens, little screens, old eyes, young eyes, get some 
feedback.

Enough for one post.  Hope this helps, I'd be happy to discuss this 
or work on it further with you,

-- 
Eric A. Cohen   |   FloCo -- Florence Communication
eac2222 at gmail.com