Serif or San Serif in digital design?
UberFreak
to ask your opinions on the use of Serif Fonts in digital design. I
personally (with no formal typographic training) feel that Serif fonts are
messy and even with good anti-aliasing loose their lines on the screen. In
fact I have never come across a site extensively using Serif, that looks
good.
Am I wrong or just short sighted.
Regards
UberFreak
Tor de Vries
The answer is: yes.
At small point size, serif typefaces tend to lose their serifs (and
terminals, brackets, spurs, ties, links, etc.), especially when antialiased.
That doesn't make them unusable. In large blocks of copy, aliased serif
fonts are generally easier to read. For text that will be 14 points or
larger (and will be antialiased, such as in a Flash animation) there is no
reason to avoid serif fonts -- they will be just fine. Times Roman isn't
great onscreen, but newer faces like Georgia look pretty good. Text-heavy
sites like Time Magazine, Newsweek, MacWeek and Yahoo! (just to name a few)
use a lot of serif faces.
Sans serif typefaces are more popular on the web because (as you said) they
appear to be cleaner, and they do antialias better (for all the Flash and
Photoshop mavens). Serif fonts usually make their appearance as subtitles
or call-outs (such as in many articles at
http://www.adobe.com/web/gallery/main.html or the section subtitles at
http://www.zoetics.com).
If you were a print designer who said they didn't like serif faces, I would
have really chewed you out. But if you stick to web design, you can
probably get away with your no-serifs rule.
tdv
jaymus
face, eh? (I think that's the previous thread you're refering to).
Just because you can't find a serif face that looks good when pixelated
doesn't mean you should stop using serifs altogether. San serifs can look
just as messy, but you have no problem using them.
The worries of what a font will look like in digital media is a very small
aspect compared to the much larger considerations imposed by typography. If
you are not able to receive any formal training, I would suggest that you
read up on the subject.
An excellent book that covers all of the basics is Robert Bringhurst's
Elements of Typographic Style. I consider it a must have. Read that book
cover to cover and understand what it says, and you will be able to answer
your question yourself with intelligence.
Jay
--
___________________________________________
Jaymus Creative
http://www.jaymuscreative.com
___________________________________________
UberFreak wrote in message ...
Dimitri
With due respect I think it's just one opinion. And your personal
preferences don't always trump the paying customer's, nor a more
suitable style of conveying the message. But your *professional* opinion
should be that you can work around your personal tastes and make just
about anything look good. A professional has to explore alternative
methods / styles and then make the case for change. If one always works
within strict prerequisites they will forever be looking for
applications that fit neatly in their safety zone. I don't think a
designer can afford to be so timid in a field that demands constant
exploration.
Tor de Vries
> for applications that fit neatly in their safety zone. I don't think a
> designer can afford to be so timid in a field that demands constant
> exploration.
Some designers are able to do that, though. It depends on the market and
the clientele available to you. For example, Mike C. recently said, "I
prefer to do work that I like doing, clients that want the same standard
logo can find that with any graphic artist. I prefer to offer my
style instead." Sounds like he is comfortable in a niche and can afford to
stay there. Nothing wrong with that.
I prefer diversity, myself.
tdv
Dimitri
to wait for people to come along who admire either his prices and/ or
his 'style'.
For the energetic designer wishing to grow a business this philosophy
would be very risky.
Of course I tend to answer in general terms when people don't preface
their questions with mitigating or exclusive circumstances. So I have
to presume this post was not from a world-reknown talent, retired
grandmother, 10 year old, or millionaire- anyone who might view limited
application as an affordable luxury.
--
Panta Design Studio
UberFreak
explored, I have done some exploring myself.
Take this example: Your client (a vicar say) comes to you wanting a flyer
for his summer fate, his idea is to use 50 different fonts in yellow on a
white background.
What your saying is that I should work around my personal tastes and explore
the avenue of bad design, giving Mr. Pervy Vicar a flyer that cant be read
buy the blue rinse brigade that's going to visit his church fate?
Regards
UberFreak
(British to American translation is not available)
"Dimitri" <pla...@the-spa.com> wrote in message
news:39E0A88E...@the-spa.com...
Tor de Vries
> would be very risky.
Agreed. Design flexibility is necessary if you: (a) want to grow your
business, (b) want a broader range of clients, (c) need to prove that you
are not a "one-trick pony", or (d) are really desperate for clients.
Tor de Vries
> the avenue of bad design, giving Mr. Pervy Vicar a flyer that cant be read
> buy the blue rinse brigade that's going to visit his church fate?
You're taking Dimitri's comments to an illogical extreme. As a designer,
you should know better than your client what will look good and what won't.
The point is not to give in to the client (which would make the client the
artist, and you just a mouse caddy), or to limit yourself to your own
limited, specific style (which might be contrary to the client's needs).
The point is to do what looks good, which involves exploring multiple
avenues and picking the right one. You should be able to skip over the
"avenues of bad design" automatically; that doesn't mean you only go down
your own.
What YOU said originally was that you would never use serif fonts. That is
unfortunate, because there are clients and projects that are best served
with serif fonts.
Mike C.
Dimitri wrote:
> A professional has to explore alternative
> methods / styles and then make the case for change. If one always works
> within strict prerequisites they will forever be looking for
> applications that fit neatly in their safety zone.
A "professional" does not have to explore alternative methods.
YOUR view of a professional might have to do that, but the
reality is that there are many professional artists that develop
a style and stay with that style and take clients that want that style.
So there.
":^) ®
> I don't think a
> designer can afford to be so timid in a field that demands constant
> exploration.
"Thank you for sharing your opinion; can you guess the value I
place on it?" ®
":^) ®
--
Mike C.
* Logo Design
* DHTML & GIF Animation
* Custom Graphics for YOUR Site!
Stop by and see if my skills and talents are up to your standards.
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
NEW SITE at: http://www.mikeslogoland.com/
mailto:mi...@artistmike.com?Subject=Logo.Project
UberFreak
"Mike C." <mi...@artistmike.com> wrote in message
news:3A3140CA...@artistmike.com...
UberFreak
needed but I also still think that it looks god awful
Regards
"Tor de Vries" <tdev...@liq.com> wrote in message
news:B656A214.FA82%tdev...@liq.com...
Tor de Vries
> needed but I also still think that it looks god awful
*shrug*
Whatever you want. It will probably be difficult for you to ever think of a
serif font as the right choice if you always think serifs are ugly.
"One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike.
Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind."
- Apostle Paul, in Romans 14:5
tdv
Mike C.
Dimitri wrote:
>
> Mike is comfortable in a semi-retired stage of life where he can afford
> to wait for people to come along who admire either his prices and/ or
> his 'style'.
I will be doing this for the rest of my life. There is no rush.
UberFreak
a d d
http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/97/48/index3a_page6.html?tw=graphics_fonts
BH
UberFreak wrote:
--
A Digital Dreamer
http://www.adigitaldreamer.com
br...@adigitaldreamer.com
"For designers that dare to dream digital..."
Tor de Vries
I'll simplify it.
You said, in essence, that you would use a serif font if it was appropriate,
but you still think that "it looks god awful". Right?
I replied, in essence, that if you think serif fonts are ugly, you will
never think of them as the right choice. It is unlikely, anyway.
Maybe you meant that you will use serif fonts only if required by the
client. In that case, ignore my reply.
The verse was a way of saying: do what you believe is right in this matter.
tdv
Tor de Vries
>
> http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/97/48/index3a_page6.html?tw=graphics_fonts
Good one. The previous five chapters of the article are also salient.
tdv
UberFreak
desperately looking around for my coat so I could run without leaving
anything behind.
Regards
"Tor de Vries" <tdev...@liq.com> wrote in message
news:B656C032.FB00%tdev...@liq.com...
Dimitri
"Mike C." wrote:
>
> Dimitri wrote:
>
> > A professional has to explore alternative
> > methods / styles and then make the case for change. If one always works
> > within strict prerequisites they will forever be looking for
> > applications that fit neatly in their safety zone.
>
> A "professional" does not have to explore alternative methods.
> YOUR view of a professional might have to do that, but the
> reality is that there are many professional artists that develop
> a style and stay with that style and take clients that want that style.
>
> So there.
>
This conversation is not about anomolies such as yourself who by virtue
of financial freedom do not place high demands on artistic hobbies which
bring in a few bucks here and there to supplement other income.
Mike C.
I suggest that you go through an "Illustrators Showcase" catalog
and you will see artists/illustrators that develop a style and
stick with.
I suggest that you don't know what you are writing about.
Dimitri
"Mike C." wrote:
>
> Dimitri wrote:
> >
> > "Mike C." wrote:
> > >
> > > Dimitri wrote:
> > >
> > > > A professional has to explore alternative
> > > > methods / styles and then make the case for change. If one always works
> > > > within strict prerequisites they will forever be looking for
> > > > applications that fit neatly in their safety zone.
> > >
> > > A "professional" does not have to explore alternative methods.
> > > YOUR view of a professional might have to do that, but the
> > > reality is that there are many professional artists that develop
> > > a style and stay with that style and take clients that want that style.
> > >
> > > So there.
> > >
> >
> > This conversation is not about anomolies such as yourself who by virtue
> > of financial freedom do not place high demands on artistic hobbies which
> > bring in a few bucks here and there to supplement other income.
>
> I suggest that you go through an "Illustrators Showcase" catalog
> and you will see artists/illustrators that develop a style and
> stick with.
>
> I suggest that you don't know what you are writing about.
>
All you CAN do is suggest.
I am not dismissing the benefits of maintaining particular methods of
expression. It's that ALL styles are prone to judgement by popularity.
What is popular today has limited appeal tomorrow. There is no bottom
to limited appeal. No matter how small the market, there will be someone
ready to make a buck or two from it. You yourself prove that.
But your argument is with my reply, which was graphic DESIGN styles and
application, and in particular how application styles must meet the
whims of the commercial market. Entirely separate issue from personal
style preferences. I see a difference between styles manifested by
methodology or maturity of skills, versus styles developed to meet the
demands of topical preference or application suitability.
I implied that a commercial designer would be disadvantaged, if not
stagnated, by maintaining a lifelong and strict allegiance to a
particular method of styling an application. It WILL be a popularity
contest. For example: odds are that David Carson will not maintain his
following unless he changes his style. In his previous role he had the
luxury role of trendsetter. Hell, even the Beatles changed their musical
styles as time went on. Did they HAVE to? History would suggest that it
was an evolutionary necessity for continued success. The music business
is a perfect example of what happens to those who fail to progress,
explore, challenge- and even when NOT to. Timing is everything.
I also suggested that due to the minimal demands and risks YOU partake
of this market that you have an islander's perspective on the subject.
Your business philosophy works for you because it's a casual
perspective, not unlike a hobbiest. It would NOT work for 99% of
commercial designers who CANNOT succeed by waiting for the occasional
customer to stroll by.
You want to argue that maintaining one personal style can work, but I
never said it wouldn't. It certainly can, for awhile.
I would also suggest that YOU read some art history and biographies to
find that most all illustrators, designers, and even artists have NOT
remained with one personal style throughout their careers. I would
challenge you to name one who did and did not suffer for it.
Mike C.
Dimitri wrote:
>
> "Mike C." wrote:
> >
> > Dimitri wrote:
> > >
> > > "Mike C." wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dimitri wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A professional has to explore alternative
> > > > > methods / styles and then make the case for change. If one always works
> > > > > within strict prerequisites they will forever be looking for
> > > > > applications that fit neatly in their safety zone.
> > > >
> > > > A "professional" does not have to explore alternative methods.
> > > > YOUR view of a professional might have to do that, but the
> > > > reality is that there are many professional artists that develop
> > > > a style and stay with that style and take clients that want that style.
> > > >
> > > > So there.
> > > >
> > >
> > > This conversation is not about anomolies such as yourself who by virtue
> > > of financial freedom do not place high demands on artistic hobbies which
> > > bring in a few bucks here and there to supplement other income.
> >
> > I suggest that you go through an "Illustrators Showcase" catalog
> > and you will see artists/illustrators that develop a style and
> > stick with.
> >
> > I suggest that you don't know what you are writing about.
> >
>
> All you CAN do is suggest.
>
> I am not dismissing the benefits of maintaining particular methods of
> expression. It's that ALL styles are prone to judgement by popularity.
That is not the only criteria for choosing a style. You are so
worried about being "popular" that your fear drives your business decisions.
Sad.
":^) ®
> What is popular today has limited appeal tomorrow.
Irrelevant. There are enough people in the world, and with the
Internet there will be enough clients for almost any "style".
":^) ®
> No matter how small the market, there will be someone
> ready to make a buck or two from it. You yourself prove that.
There will always be someone willing to pay that "buck" for a style.
":^) ®
> I see a difference between styles manifested by
> methodology or maturity of skills, versus styles developed to meet the
> demands of topical preference or application suitability.
In the end product there is no difference. If someone could do
what I do and they had samples to prove it, and they offered a
better price, there would be no difference to the client. He
would take the better price in most cases.
":^) ®
> I implied that a commercial designer would be disadvantaged, if not
> stagnated, by maintaining a lifelong and strict allegiance to a
> particular method of styling...
Disadvantaged does not seem to be the case. Your implication is
based on your own fear of not being all things to every client.
":^) ®
> Hell, even the Beatles changed their musical
> styles as time went on.
Not everyone can be the "Beatles", or be like the "Beatles".
Not everyone needs to be the "Beatles".
":^) ®
> The music business
> is a perfect example of what happens to those who fail to progress,
> explore, challenge...
And yet there are many people that stay the same in the music
industry and make a perfectly good living.
BB King. Rolling Stones. Little Richard. There are probably
hundreds more, that basically had a style and stayed with it and
made their mark.
No need to be a chameleon and to try and be all things to all people.
":^) ®
> I also suggested that due to the minimal demands and risks YOU partake
> of this market that you have an islander's perspective on the subject.
I don't mind being casual about taking and working with who I
choose to work with. I also would suggest that a casual and
"long haul" approach to business is the way to go.
":^) ®
> Your business philosophy works for you because it's a casual
> perspective, not unlike a hobbiest. It would NOT work for 99% of
> commercial designers who CANNOT succeed by waiting for the occasional
> customer to stroll by.
Your view of "succeed" may differ from other people. I think
your guess that 99% of commercial designers attempt to be all
things to all clients is wrong.
Just look in an Illustrators Catalog and you will see samples of
what each illustrator can do, and most have a style and keep to it.
":^) ®
> You want to argue that maintaining one personal style can work, but I
> never said it wouldn't. It certainly can, for awhile.
A lifetime if you keep adding to that style.
":^) ®
> I would also suggest that YOU read some art history and biographies to
> find that most all illustrators, designers, and even artists have NOT
> remained with one personal style throughout their careers.
I did not suggest that they did. A style can incorporate
additions without changing into something completely different.
The "Beatles" were still the "Beatles" even when they changed and
added to their style.
jivvy
digital design. I personally (with no formal typographic training)
feel that Serif fonts are messy and even with good anti-aliasing loose
their lines on the screen.<<
If you're talking web page text, I agree wholeheartedly. If you're
talking graphics for screen, I think you're missing the boat. With web
page text, you have to take into consideration a huge variety of
screen resolutions and the fact that text display doesn't (on most of
today's screens) do justice to *any* font... so simple fonts (least
detail) do best and that lands you in san-serif world.
But graphics are not really fonts any more, but pictures of fonts --
and you have a lot more control over how the final product looks on
any screen... then you can use serif with some success.
Whether you like them or not. ;)
Claire
Nic
aaaaaarrrgggh - i have been lurking/reading posts for ages and i just have
to say Mike you can be a SNAPPERHEAD! You acid tongue posts obviously bring
out the 'silly person who shall say what i please' within ;)
I'm sure no-one would dispute that what you do is good if it suits a
specific chrome/effects/bevel/cartoon style, as has been mentioned - but
some might suggest that 'your style' could be fairly limited - when you
obviously have the technical experience (and years of general design
expereince) that could produce other things.
I think MOST people's view of a professional would fit somewhere along the
lines of - having enough experience and disparate influences to interpret a
clients creative direction - adding and improving on it - perhaps adding a
stamp of your own personal style - IF it suits the client's scope -
otherwise - maybe it would be a challenge to step out of those boundaries
you construct for yourself - create a grea design, and add to your
'repetoire' in the meantime:)
in article 3A3140CA...@artistmike.com, Mike C. at mi...@artistmike.com
wrote on 9/12/00 4:11 AM:
Nic
hurried typing rendered the majority of my ramblings incoherent
burble burble glug glug
:)
in article B658970A.13B3%nicol...@optusnet.com.au, Nic at
nicol...@optusnet.com.au wrote on 10/12/00 2:12 AM:
madman
I would think being able to eat, buy clothes , and live a good life drives
his decisions.... and mine, and hers, and his, etc etc.
Maybe it comes down to mindset
For you Mike C. your work is art. That's cool, your a more traditional
artist less a designer. Designers solve problems and communicate in the most
efficient and eye catching way possible. Artist have a style or look. And
occasionally that style will be the most efficient and eye catching way to
solve a problem.
Mike C. = artist
For Dimitri the art is in fitting his work to that of the customers. Also an
art form, just a different kind. His makes more money, which is nice, and
gains his satisfaction through being able to tailor his design to the
problem. Something not very easy.
Mike C. = Designer
Neither title is perfect or better then the other, and my definition is
rudimentary at best.
"wtf do I know"
Madman
"Mike C." <mi...@artistmike.com> wrote in message
news:3A31FB9C...@artistmike.com...
madman
problem. Something not very easy.
Dimitri = Designer
"madman" <madma...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:w3TY5.426887$4d.54...@news02.optonline.net...
Tor de Vries
> find that most all illustrators, designers, and even artists have NOT
> remained with one personal style throughout their careers. I would
> challenge you to name one who did and did not suffer for it.
Umm, try de Kooning. After years of painting those near-Pollock portraits
of women -- and growing very famous for it -- he returned to painting more
traditional landscapes (if I remember right). The art world dropped him
like a fake Renoir.
Of course, the art world is fickle in that way. Graphic design is a whole
other universe.
tdv