Interesting discussion: a journal I edit has just been criticised for using a sans-serif font (Arial 10-point) as body text. My reaction was that it's a modern-looking, clean and easy-to-read font . Any comments?
John Coyle Brisbane, Australia -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Stenquist Sent: Thursday, 15 September 2011 11:08 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: PESO - Healing Vibrations On Sep 14, 2011, at 8:54 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > Paul Stenquist wrote: > >> I hate comic sans. Chalkboard is slightly better, but it's still a silly >> font. >> As far as being an imitation goes, that's true of many, many fonts. >> Futura is an imitation of Helvetica, > > Futura predates Helvetica by about 25 years. (Arial is the imitation > Helvetica.) > Well then, Helvetica is an imitation of Futura:-). In truth, I can see that arial is closer to helvetica than is futura. My point is that many fonts differ only slightly from their bretheren. There are so many fonts available that choosing one over the other is usually just splitting hairs. I recently had to help write specs for a magazine redesign. Since i'm no font expert, I merely looked at what was used in the pubs that won awards. (The majority of mags use two fonts, with a san serif in headlines and a serif in body copy, with some playful switching here and there.) The resulting recommendation was adobe garamond pro and arial. They are, of course, totally different, so they're happy together -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
