Re: Font readability?

Subject: Re: Font readability?
From: Romay Jean Sitze <rositze -at- NMSU -dot- EDU>
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 1995 21:27:14 -0600

On Fri, 7 Apr 1995, Arlen P. Walker wrote:

> I can't quote the source, but I remember reading that san serif makes for good
> display type, but serif fonts are more readable in smaller, book-style
printing.
> There's something about the serifs which leads your eye to the next character,
> making words more clearly seen.

> Anybody else, or am I halucinating again?

You're not hallucinating. Tom Lichty (_Design Pringiples for Desktop
Publishers_) says that serifs cut down on the reflection of light from
around the letter (halation), links the letters in a word and provides a
horizontal guideline, and helps distinguish one letter form another, thus
making life easier for the reader. He also recommends sans serif fonts
for anything under 8 points in x-height. He also mentions that many
experts claim that sans serif typefaces are just as readable at any
height as serif fonts.

I suspect that what it all boils down to is: Use whatever you prefer when
it comes to serif or sans serif typefaces.


RoMay Sitze, rositze -at- nmsu -dot- edu
The body of every organization is structured from four kinds of
bones. There are the wishbones, who spend all their time wishing
someone would do the work. Then there are the jawbones, who do
all the talking, but little else. The knucklebones knock every-
thing anybody else tries to do. Fortunately, in every organization
there are also the backbones, who get under the load and do most of
the work.


Previous by Author: Re: Romay Jean Sitze said:
Next by Author: Re: Refresh vs Update
Previous by Thread: Re: Font readability?
Next by Thread: Re: Font readability?


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads