RE: Questions about look and feel
Kelly, this is the best description I've seen so far on why serif fonts might be easier to read on the printed page. It doesn't seem to address, though, why serif fonts might NOT be ideal on the screen. I suspect that the simpler forms are easier to read in the constant light emitted from an electronic display, but that isn't stated precisely... S -Original Message- From: Kelly McDaniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 9:21 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: Questions about look and feel. OK, you've worn down my resistance and I must register my observations. Reading on the computer screen is different from reading a printed page. Reading on an LDC or TFT display is slightly different than reading on a CRT. (A CRT oscillates at, or very, very near the frequency of the electric supply current. LCD and TFT displays do not oscillate, or at least they display a more intense image persistance.) The printed page depends on reflected light. The background of the page reflects all wavelengths (rendered white...most of the time, anyway) and the print on the page blocks all wavelengths (rendered black...same proviso as background) of light. On the printed page, serifs serve the purpose of making the outline of each printed character distinct from the background by creating a longer border between the printed character and the background. This provides the eye more information whereby it can decode the character. Once again, the printed page depends on reflected light, and how well the characters block the reflection (render resolution.) There is a spanner (disturbance variable) in the works, however, and the spanner is this: The publisher has no control over the quality, color, or amount of light. Serifs help resolve this issue. Reading glasses help even more. Reading on a computer display differs from reading the printed page in this respect: The light is direct, in contrast to reflected light. Light emanates from the display. The characters and the background both block all wavelengths of light that are not contained in their respective colors. This difference is an important consideration when deciding to use serif or sans serif fonts. Reflection, refraction, and ocular persistence come into play. In general, serif fonts are better for printed works. Sans serif fonts are better for screen displays, but, I could be wrong...regards, Kelly. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel
It seems that the resolution on paper (no pixels) would be crisper than on screen. So to me the serif fonts would be too cluttery on screen. Cheers, Dan--Ft. Lauderdale Kelly, this is the best description I've seen so far on why serif fonts might be easier to read on the printed page. It doesn't seem to address, though, why serif fonts might NOT be ideal on the screen. I suspect that the simpler forms are easier to read in the constant light emitted from an electronic display, but that isn't stated precisely... ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel
May I suggest that the native resolution of the reader's display device, the graphic card resolution setting, the display brightness and other user settings or choices regarding their CRT or LCD display has at least as much to do with the legibility, reader comfort and reader retention when reading on-screen text as does the use of serif or sans-serif fonts. Unfortunately, the wide range of display variables cannot be controlled by the document publisher. Another factor detracting from the usability of documents (the feel part of look and feel) is the overuse of cross-references that require a reader to jump back and forth too many times in order to assimilate a train of thought that ought to be presented in a linear fashion. Just because you can do it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Cedar Ridge Systems ** At 11:33 AM 5/12/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems that the resolution on paper (no pixels) would be crisper than on screen. So to me the serif fonts would be too cluttery on screen. Cheers, Dan--Ft. Lauderdale Kelly, this is the best description I've seen so far on why serif fonts might be easier to read on the printed page. It doesn't seem to address, though, why serif fonts might NOT be ideal on the screen. I suspect that the simpler forms are easier to read in the constant light emitted from an electronic display, but that isn't stated precisely... ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dennisb%40chronometrics.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Director of Engineering CEDAR RIDGE SYSTEMS 15019 Rattlesnake Road Grass Valley, CA 95945-8710 Office: (530) 477-9015 Fax: (530) 477-9085 Mobile: (530) 320-9025 eMail: dennisb /at/ chronometrics /dot/ com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Questions about look and feel
Apropos of nothing, this applies to PowerPoint as well. On 5/12/08, Dennis Brunnenmeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just because you can do it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Cedar Ridge Systems ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel
Well, thank you kindly, Steve. The mystery is contained herein: On the printed page, serifs serve the purpose of making the outline of each printed character distinct from the background by creating a longer border between the printed character and the background. On the printed page, light reflected from the page surrounding the printed character appears, to the eye, to form a smooth edge. Serifs make the edge longer, thereby providing more information for the brain to quickly recognize the character. Following is a very broad generalization and varies according to resolution, font, definition... On the computer display, the characters and background are formed from pixels. Pixels have smooth, parallel edges that enclose their color. Sans serif fonts appear crispier on the display because the character edge is more likely to mate with a pixel edge. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven Miller Sent: 2008-05-12 13:21 To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: Questions about look and feel Kelly, this is the best description I've seen so far on why serif fonts might be easier to read on the printed page. It doesn't seem to address, though, why serif fonts might NOT be ideal on the screen. I suspect that the simpler forms are easier to read in the constant light emitted from an electronic display, but that isn't stated precisely... S -Original Message- From: Kelly McDaniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 9:21 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: Questions about look and feel. OK, you've worn down my resistance and I must register my observations. Reading on the computer screen is different from reading a printed page. Reading on an LDC or TFT display is slightly different than reading on a CRT. (A CRT oscillates at, or very, very near the frequency of the electric supply current. LCD and TFT displays do not oscillate, or at least they display a more intense image persistance.) The printed page depends on reflected light. The background of the page reflects all wavelengths (rendered white...most of the time, anyway) and the print on the page blocks all wavelengths (rendered black...same proviso as background) of light. On the printed page, serifs serve the purpose of making the outline of each printed character distinct from the background by creating a longer border between the printed character and the background. This provides the eye more information whereby it can decode the character. Once again, the printed page depends on reflected light, and how well the characters block the reflection (render resolution.) There is a spanner (disturbance variable) in the works, however, and the spanner is this: The publisher has no control over the quality, color, or amount of light. Serifs help resolve this issue. Reading glasses help even more. Reading on a computer display differs from reading the printed page in this respect: The light is direct, in contrast to reflected light. Light emanates from the display. The characters and the background both block all wavelengths of light that are not contained in their respective colors. This difference is an important consideration when deciding to use serif or sans serif fonts. Reflection, refraction, and ocular persistence come into play. In general, serif fonts are better for printed works. Sans serif fonts are better for screen displays, but, I could be wrong...regards, Kelly. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/kmcdaniel%40pavtech. com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel
Kelly... The second sentence below is more or less true only for LCD displays. It is not true for CRT displays. The electron beam in a CRT cannot illuminate individual pictures on the CRT face. It merely brushes across them, through what is known as a shadow mask, with a not-perfectly-defined beam size. That's why even good CRT displays seem soft after having used a good LCD display for a while. The last sentence is definitely not true, although the chance of it being valid are better if the native resolution of an LCD display matches the display resolution of the graphics adapter. If the graphics card setting does not match the native resolution of the monitor, aliasing artifacts in the viewed image can cause greater legibility issues with fonts, especially small ones. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Cedar Ridge Systems. * At 12:27 PM 5/12/2008, Kelly McDaniel wrote: On the computer display, the characters and background are formed from pixels. Pixels have smooth, parallel edges that enclose their color. Sans serif fonts appear crispier on the display because the character edge is more likely to mate with a pixel edge. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Director of Engineering CEDAR RIDGE SYSTEMS 15019 Rattlesnake Road Grass Valley, CA 95945-8710 Office: (530) 477-9015 Fax: (530) 477-9085 Mobile: (530) 320-9025 eMail: dennisb /at/ chronometrics /dot/ com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel
In a very recent post, I included an unfortunate typographical error. The sentence below has been corrected. Dennis... *** At 12:41 PM 5/12/2008, Dennis Brunnenmeyer wrote: The electron beam in a CRT cannot illuminate individual pictures pixels on the CRT face. It merely brushes across them, through what is known as a shadow mask, with a not-perfectly-defined beam size. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Cedar Ridge Systems. * At 12:27 PM 5/12/2008, Kelly McDaniel wrote: On the computer display, the characters and background are formed from pixels. Pixels have smooth, parallel edges that enclose their color. Sans serif fonts appear crispier on the display because the character edge is more likely to mate with a pixel edge. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Director of Engineering CEDAR RIDGE SYSTEMS 15019 Rattlesnake Road Grass Valley, CA 95945-8710 Office: (530) 477-9015 Fax: (530) 477-9085 Mobile: (530) 320-9025 eMail: dennisb /at/ chronometrics /dot/ com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dennisb%40chronometrics.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Director of Engineering CEDAR RIDGE SYSTEMS 15019 Rattlesnake Road Grass Valley, CA 95945-8710 Office: (530) 477-9015 Fax: (530) 477-9085 Mobile: (530) 320-9025 eMail: dennisb /at/ chronometrics /dot/ com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel
Well, I did make the correction to the typo, but it seems as though this list server doesn't support features such as text strikeout, colored or bold text. What a shame. At any rate, THIS TIME the sentence reads correctly. I'll repeat it here for clarity; The electron beam in a CRT cannot illuminate individual pixels on the CRT face. It merely brushes across them, through what is known as a shadow mask, with a not-perfectly-defined beam size. Comment: Pixels as discussed in this manner, as you probably know, are actually made of three adjacent picture elements, each generating a different color: red, green and blue. This grouping of three elements comprises a triad, one pixel. When I say that a CRT cannot illuminate individual pixels, what I am saying is that with a CRT display, the illumination of individual pixels is not a perfect process. The dynamics of an analog interface/electron beam deflection system/shadow mask/phosphor CRT can only closely approximate what the video card wants it to display. Enough of this off-topic stuff. The whole point I was trying to make earlier is that the viewer's monitor type and display settings affects the readability of text just as much (I think) as the choice of fonts. We can only choose the latter. Any studies on screen readability need to take this into account. I suspect that if the display system is a good, high resolution display properly configured, serif fonts would continue to be preferable. With lesser quality displays, I suspect the opposite. Amazon's Kindle apparently uses both serif and sans serif fonts. Dennis... At 03:30 PM 5/12/2008, Dennis Brunnenmeyer wrote: In a very recent post, I included an unfortunate typographical error. The sentence below has been corrected. Dennis... *** At 12:41 PM 5/12/2008, Dennis Brunnenmeyer wrote: The electron beam in a CRT cannot illuminate individual pixels on the CRT face. It merely brushes across them, through what is known as a shadow mask, with a not-perfectly-defined beam size. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Cedar Ridge Systems. * At 12:27 PM 5/12/2008, Kelly McDaniel wrote: On the computer display, the characters and background are formed from pixels. Pixels have smooth, parallel edges that enclose their color. Sans serif fonts appear crispier on the display because the character edge is more likely to mate with a pixel edge. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Director of Engineering CEDAR RIDGE SYSTEMS 15019 Rattlesnake Road Grass Valley, CA 95945-8710 Office: (530) 477-9015 Fax: (530) 477-9085 Mobile: (530) 320-9025 eMail: dennisb /at/ chronometrics /dot/ com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dennisb%40chron ometrics.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Director of Engineering CEDAR RIDGE SYSTEMS 15019 Rattlesnake Road Grass Valley, CA 95945-8710 Office: (530) 477-9015 Fax: (530) 477-9085 Mobile: (530) 320-9025 eMail: dennisb /at/ chronometrics /dot/ com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/dennisb%40chronometrics.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. Dennis Brunnenmeyer Director of Engineering CEDAR RIDGE SYSTEMS 15019 Rattlesnake Road Grass Valley, CA 95945-8710 Office: (530) 477-9015 Fax: (530) 477-9085 Mobile: (530) 320-9025 eMail: dennisb /at/ chronometrics /dot/ com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel.
Hello Frank, While I agree with some of the things Kelly said, I worked in the video industry for seven years, specifically with CCTV cameras and CRT monitors, and I do not quite agree with her explanation of how a CRT connected to a computer works. On a TV screen, the picture is divided into two overlapping frames (the feature is called interlacing) and does appear to oscillate if the refresh rate is at 60 Hz and if you look closely enough. Its called 525/60/2:1 and is a very low definition picture. But the TV industry is now working toward high definition TV (HDTV) which uses more scan lines per picture and a higher refresh rate to make the picture appear more solid. The picture on a CRT computer screen does not use the interlace method. It uses a single frame (non interlaced) that is redrawn in a linear fashion from top to bottom at a refresh rate from 60 to 85 Hz or more. When using a CRT in a room with fluorescent lighting, many people can see what is called flicker on the screen, because the fluorescent lights also operate at 60 Hz. To correct that problem, manufacturers of video cards, drivers, and CRTs have included higher refresh rates that users can choose. The higher frequency you choose, the more solid the picture appears. Your question regarding fonts is a good one and has been asked many times on this list over the 14 years I have been on it. I don't know about fonts which reek of leadership, but there are fonts that have been designed for on-screen use. I do know that several fonts do seem to scream Important to the reader. Arial Black My pubs department recently addressed the font issues when we switched from a primarily PDF-for-printing to a primarily PDF-for-online-use paradigm. We searched the net and found reports from several readability studies on this. The studies tested and rated several fonts for on screen readability and user-friendliness. Although the results differed some, fonts such as Verdana and Tahoma rated high. I have an email that includes a table that compares several fonts, gives the results, and includes the links to the studies. However the email is in HTML format and this list accepts only plain text. I will forward that email to you directly. If anyone else wants a copy, let me know. HTH Diane Gaskill Hitachi Data Systems == -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dodd, Frank J Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 10:50 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: Questions about look and feel. Thank you for the info. Very informative. Now I know why my eyes burn at the end of the day..its those damned rays! Where does credibility, authority and believability fit in with all of this? Which font? I want a font that, when viewed, reeks of leadership! Frank -Original Message- From: Kelly McDaniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 9:21 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: Questions about look and feel. OK, you've worn down my resistance and I must register my observations. Reading on the computer screen is different from reading a printed page. Reading on an LDC or TFT display is slightly different than reading on a CRT. (A CRT oscillates at, or very, very near the frequency of the electric supply current. LCD and TFT displays do not oscillate, or at least they display a more intense image persistance.) The printed page depends on reflected light. The background of the page reflects all wavelengths (rendered white...most of the time, anyway) and the print on the page blocks all wavelengths (rendered black...same proviso as background) of light. On the printed page, serifs serve the purpose of making the outline of each printed character distinct from the background by creating a longer border between the printed character and the background. This provides the eye more information whereby it can decode the character. Once again, the printed page depends on reflected light, and how well the characters block the reflection (render resolution.) There is a spanner (disturbance variable) in the works, however, and the spanner is this: The publisher has no control over the quality, color, or amount of light. Serifs help resolve this issue. Reading glasses help even more. Reading on a computer display differs from reading the printed page in this respect: The light is direct, in contrast to reflected light. Light emanates from the display. The characters and the background both block all wavelengths of light that are not contained in their respective colors. This difference is an important consideration when deciding to use serif or sans serif fonts. Reflection, refraction, and ocular persistence come into play. In general, serif fonts are better for printed works. Sans serif fonts are better for screen displays, but, I could be wrong...regards, Kelly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
RE: Questions about look and feel.
Thank you for the info. Very informative. Now I know why my eyes burn at the end of the day..its those damned rays! Where does credibility, authority and believability fit in with all of this? Which font? I want a font that, when viewed, reeks of leadership! Frank -Original Message- From: Kelly McDaniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 9:21 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: RE: Questions about look and feel. OK, you've worn down my resistance and I must register my observations. Reading on the computer screen is different from reading a printed page. Reading on an LDC or TFT display is slightly different than reading on a CRT. (A CRT oscillates at, or very, very near the frequency of the electric supply current. LCD and TFT displays do not oscillate, or at least they display a more intense image persistance.) The printed page depends on reflected light. The background of the page reflects all wavelengths (rendered white...most of the time, anyway) and the print on the page blocks all wavelengths (rendered black...same proviso as background) of light. On the printed page, serifs serve the purpose of making the outline of each printed character distinct from the background by creating a longer border between the printed character and the background. This provides the eye more information whereby it can decode the character. Once again, the printed page depends on reflected light, and how well the characters block the reflection (render resolution.) There is a spanner (disturbance variable) in the works, however, and the spanner is this: The publisher has no control over the quality, color, or amount of light. Serifs help resolve this issue. Reading glasses help even more. Reading on a computer display differs from reading the printed page in this respect: The light is direct, in contrast to reflected light. Light emanates from the display. The characters and the background both block all wavelengths of light that are not contained in their respective colors. This difference is an important consideration when deciding to use serif or sans serif fonts. Reflection, refraction, and ocular persistence come into play. In general, serif fonts are better for printed works. Sans serif fonts are better for screen displays, but, I could be wrong...regards, Kelly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stuart Rogers Sent: 2008-05-09 10:40 To: Mike Wickham Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Questions about look and feel. Mike Wickham wrote: 2. Do people think that a Sans Serif font improves legibility for body text? Using a sans serif font for body text greatly reduces reader comprehension. Obtain a copy of Colin Wheildon's _Type and Layout: Are You Communicating or Just Making Pretty Shapes?_ The book contains actual studies showing the effects on readability and comprehension of serif vs. sans serif fonts, color type, bold and italic type, justified paragraphs, etc. It's a fantastic book: http://www.amazon.com/Type-Layout-Communicating-Making-Pretty/dp/1875750 223 After reading both the positive and (very) negative reviews on Amazon, I put a hold on a copy from the library rather than rush to buy. Sounds like it could be either a well-researched factual treatment, or an opinion piece supported by dubious methodology. Also sounds like it is geared to advertising rather than book-length text, and I very much doubt that what's good for the former applies uniformly to the latter. But I shall reserve judgement until I've actually read the thing! Thanks for the reference, Mike, -- Stuart Rogers Technical Communicator Phoenix Geophysics Limited Toronto, ON, Canada +1 (416) 491-7340 x 325 srogers phoenix-geophysics com A man's screech should exceed his rasp, or what's a violin for? --another Rogers Original ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/kmcdaniel%40pavtech. com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/frank.j.dodd%40boein g.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http
Re: Questions about look and feel.
I'd look at Apple documents and IBM documents to see some good examples. Both are online. Joel On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 4:30 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, all. This is perhaps a bit of a vague set of questions, but I am interested in improving the look of our manuals and specifications documentation and would like to see what others are doing in this regard. 1. Specifically, I am working on various manuals for our software API's as well as general technical specifications. 2. These tend to be reasonably dry documents, where I have used numbering for chapter and section titles so people can refer to them by those numbers when talking internally here, as well as when we get questions from our customers. 3. The target audience for most of these documents are engineers (software and hardware) and technical managers and the like. No consumer docs, or marketing folks or web page formats, etc. 4. At the present time, my chapter and title fonts are Arial (various sizes depending on the section and subsection level) and my body font is Palatino Linotype in 11 point. 5. Pretty much in black text most everywhere, except where I use Red italic font in a sidehead to make certain short one-to-two sentence notes (also in italic, but in black) stand out right next to the sidehead word. These are important notes to not overlook by the reader. My goal is to improve legibility. 1. Are there any sample documents (at any site) that people could point me to as ones that they liked a lot for (a) legibility and (b) readability for such documents? 2. Do people think that a Sans Serif font improves legibility for body text? I have seen some recent manual examples using Calibri in a 10 point size (that I wasn't sure that I particularly liked, but if it makes things easier to read, then I'd be willing to try it). 3. What about color? Like in Section and chapter titles? 4. In many places in my manuals, I have numbers (usually enclosed in quotes to designate strings) that I show in a fixed-width font (using Consulas in 11 point), even when in paragraphs that have body text in Palatino. I have experimented with making these a fairly Dark Blue color, and also tried bold (in black), to make them stand out a bit more. This seems to work reasonably well, but I am not sure that I want to get too much color in these manuals and specifications just yet, so I have not actually sent anything out yet! Finally ... 1. I am looking to see if I can find a few people to look at two PDF extracts (less than 10 or 20 pages) from two of my manuals/specifications to get some critiques along the above lines - look and feel criticism only (the words and content are a different thing entirely J!). Any volunteers who could take a bit of time for this? Thanks in advance! Regards, Z ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/eleysium%40gmail.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Questions about look and feel.
Mike Wickham wrote: 2. Do people think that a Sans Serif font improves legibility for body text? Using a sans serif font for body text greatly reduces reader comprehension. Obtain a copy of Colin Wheildon's _Type and Layout: Are You Communicating or Just Making Pretty Shapes?_ The book contains actual studies showing the effects on readability and comprehension of serif vs. sans serif fonts, color type, bold and italic type, justified paragraphs, etc. It's a fantastic book: http://www.amazon.com/Type-Layout-Communicating-Making-Pretty/dp/1875750223 After reading both the positive and (very) negative reviews on Amazon, I put a hold on a copy from the library rather than rush to buy. Sounds like it could be either a well-researched factual treatment, or an opinion piece supported by dubious methodology. Also sounds like it is geared to advertising rather than book-length text, and I very much doubt that what's good for the former applies uniformly to the latter. But I shall reserve judgement until I've actually read the thing! Thanks for the reference, Mike, -- Stuart Rogers Technical Communicator Phoenix Geophysics Limited Toronto, ON, Canada +1 (416) 491-7340 x 325 srogers phoenix-geophysics com A man's screech should exceed his rasp, or what's a violin for? --another Rogers Original ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel.
OK, you've worn down my resistance and I must register my observations. Reading on the computer screen is different from reading a printed page. Reading on an LDC or TFT display is slightly different than reading on a CRT. (A CRT oscillates at, or very, very near the frequency of the electric supply current. LCD and TFT displays do not oscillate, or at least they display a more intense image persistance.) The printed page depends on reflected light. The background of the page reflects all wavelengths (rendered white...most of the time, anyway) and the print on the page blocks all wavelengths (rendered black...same proviso as background) of light. On the printed page, serifs serve the purpose of making the outline of each printed character distinct from the background by creating a longer border between the printed character and the background. This provides the eye more information whereby it can decode the character. Once again, the printed page depends on reflected light, and how well the characters block the reflection (render resolution.) There is a spanner (disturbance variable) in the works, however, and the spanner is this: The publisher has no control over the quality, color, or amount of light. Serifs help resolve this issue. Reading glasses help even more. Reading on a computer display differs from reading the printed page in this respect: The light is direct, in contrast to reflected light. Light emanates from the display. The characters and the background both block all wavelengths of light that are not contained in their respective colors. This difference is an important consideration when deciding to use serif or sans serif fonts. Reflection, refraction, and ocular persistence come into play. In general, serif fonts are better for printed works. Sans serif fonts are better for screen displays, but, I could be wrong...regards, Kelly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stuart Rogers Sent: 2008-05-09 10:40 To: Mike Wickham Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Questions about look and feel. Mike Wickham wrote: 2. Do people think that a Sans Serif font improves legibility for body text? Using a sans serif font for body text greatly reduces reader comprehension. Obtain a copy of Colin Wheildon's _Type and Layout: Are You Communicating or Just Making Pretty Shapes?_ The book contains actual studies showing the effects on readability and comprehension of serif vs. sans serif fonts, color type, bold and italic type, justified paragraphs, etc. It's a fantastic book: http://www.amazon.com/Type-Layout-Communicating-Making-Pretty/dp/1875750 223 After reading both the positive and (very) negative reviews on Amazon, I put a hold on a copy from the library rather than rush to buy. Sounds like it could be either a well-researched factual treatment, or an opinion piece supported by dubious methodology. Also sounds like it is geared to advertising rather than book-length text, and I very much doubt that what's good for the former applies uniformly to the latter. But I shall reserve judgement until I've actually read the thing! Thanks for the reference, Mike, -- Stuart Rogers Technical Communicator Phoenix Geophysics Limited Toronto, ON, Canada +1 (416) 491-7340 x 325 srogers phoenix-geophysics com A man's screech should exceed his rasp, or what's a violin for? --another Rogers Original ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/kmcdaniel%40pavtech. com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Questions about look and feel.
If you read the excerpted pages on the Amazon listing, you'll get an idea of the focus of the book. My local library system doesn't have the book, and I'm not ready to buy in a rush, either. The conflicting arguments about what's best, are reminiscent of the which is the widow, which is the orphan and spaces after a period discussions. I'll just offer a recent observation on reading a large book with a lot of sans-serif type. The third and fourth editions of The History of Graphic Design, by Meggs, are set in sans-serif. There's a lot of text and a lot of graphics in the 600-some pages. The third edition's text is very clunky, but if you're focused on content, you bear with it. The fourth edition is a lot easier to read. I can't tell if differences in the type specifications alone account for the improvement, or if the processing of the text for printing contributes to effect. I knew the third edition was uncomfortable, before I ever saw the fourth. The design of the fourth edition confirms that the quality of the reading experience is a result of the designer's skill in making choices. HTH Regards, Peter __ Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Questions about look and feel.
In general, serif fonts are better for printed works. Sans serif fonts are better for screen displays, but, I could be wrong...regards, I agree. And would note that the Wheildon studies were done well before the advent of the Web, so the book has no comment about viewing text on screen. I would also note that the original poster said his documents had no web page formats. Mike Wickham ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel.
In general, serif fonts are better for printed works. Sans serif fonts are better for screen displays, but, I could be wrong...regards, I agree. And would note that the Wheildon studies were done well before the advent of the Web, so the book has no comment about viewing text on screen. I would also note that the original poster said his documents had no web page formats. Correct! No web page formats. These are PDF technical documents for API's and the like - the expectations are that people would use PDF Readers to look at them on their screens, or print pages (or the entire document) as needed for reference. The use from Acrobat Readers is encouraged, since I use hyperlinks to take people to various places within the same document for detailed explanations of items, for example. Z ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Questions about look and feel.
2. Do people think that a Sans Serif font improves legibility for body text? Using a sans serif font for body text greatly reduces reader comprehension. Obtain a copy of Colin Wheildon's _Type and Layout: Are You Communicating or Just Making Pretty Shapes?_ The book contains actual studies showing the effects on readability and comprehension of serif vs. sans serif fonts, color type, bold and italic type, justified paragraphs, etc. It's a fantastic book: http://www.amazon.com/Type-Layout-Communicating-Making-Pretty/dp/1875750223 Book designers really need to pay attention to these kinds of things. I'm seeing more and more books with sans serif body type that might be good for a Web page, but not for a book. Recently, I ordered a book that was on a unique topic in my field. I awaited it excitedly. At first glance upon arrival, it struck me how pretty the book was, which excited me more. Then I tried to read it. I couldn't! My eyes just could not stay trained on the lines for long. The book broke every rule. It had tiny type, sans serif body text, headings with no capitalization, headings in every color of the rainbow, including some that were yellow and nearly invisible on the pages. All recto pages have color backgrounds. Do you know how hard it is to read tiny, thin, black type on a blue page? Anyway, the book was clearly a designer's dream, but it's a reader's nightmare. I still haven't read more than a few paragraph's from it. Mike Wickham ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Questions about look and feel.
Thanks for the comments and the book reference, Mike! I will get a copy ... Z -Original Message- From: Mike Wickham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 3:10 PM To: Syed Zaeem Hosain ([EMAIL PROTECTED]); framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Questions about look and feel. 2. Do people think that a Sans Serif font improves legibility for body text? Using a sans serif font for body text greatly reduces reader comprehension. Obtain a copy of Colin Wheildon's _Type and Layout: Are You Communicating or Just Making Pretty Shapes?_ The book contains actual studies showing the effects on readability and comprehension of serif vs. sans serif fonts, color type, bold and italic type, justified paragraphs, etc. It's a fantastic book: http://www.amazon.com/Type-Layout-Communicating-Making-Pretty/dp/1875750 223 Book designers really need to pay attention to these kinds of things. I'm seeing more and more books with sans serif body type that might be good for a Web page, but not for a book. Recently, I ordered a book that was on a unique topic in my field. I awaited it excitedly. At first glance upon arrival, it struck me how pretty the book was, which excited me more. Then I tried to read it. I couldn't! My eyes just could not stay trained on the lines for long. The book broke every rule. It had tiny type, sans serif body text, headings with no capitalization, headings in every color of the rainbow, including some that were yellow and nearly invisible on the pages. All recto pages have color backgrounds. Do you know how hard it is to read tiny, thin, black type on a blue page? Anyway, the book was clearly a designer's dream, but it's a reader's nightmare. I still haven't read more than a few paragraph's from it. Mike Wickham ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
