On Sunday 09 June 2013 18:46:55 Joshua Judson Rosen wrote:
> This point about being able to find fonts that are "both close to what I
> use and likely to be on Windows or Apple" a really good one. Sometimes
> it's really hard to do that, though..., except, here's a really nice
> tool for the task--that actually organises fonts by *what they look like*
> (so similar-*looking* fonts are clustered together, rather than
> similarly-*named* fonts being grouped together as in most font-selectors):
>
> "FontClustr - Automated Hierarchical Clustering of Fonts
> Based on Their Appearance"
>
> http://tinylittlelife.org/?p=233
>
>
> It's written in Python, and the code is available on Github:
>
> http://tinylittlelife.org/?page_id=255
Thank you for the link. The algorithm he used to do the sorting was the
best part. There is surely a good mathematical justification behind his
intuition. The general approach might come in handy for some related
problem. There certainly are a bunch of redundant fonts in circulation!
My font list got simplified by an article that grouped fonts by their
pre-computer applications. These were professionally designed fonts for
commercial printing. I picked 2 recommended fonts from each category. My
list has expanded over the years from the original 24 to 45. But I mostly
use just 3: Humanist 512 (headings), Monospace 821 (math), and Prestige 12
(general text).
The Prestige typewriter font lives on from the Corona portable typewriter
I used in high school and college. It is a well-designed, legible font. And
quite distinctive! Who else writes business and technical papers in an
old-fashioned fixed-pitch font?
Jim Kuzdrall
_______________________________________________
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
