Just to add some clarity to Jim’s blog here:
http://lordibelievehelpmyunbelief.blogspot.com/2008/04/blog-of-different-color.html
The typefaces used in the study he mentions are:
This typeface is Arial. ARIAL
This typeface is TIMES NEW ROMAN
This typeface is COURIER NEW
A few other typeface I like are:
Comic Sans
(Not to be confused with sans comic – that sad state of affairs when a comedian is booed off stage)
David
(Which looks a lot like Times New Roman to me making me think how the Romans really did a number on Israel).
Fifth Avenue
(A typeface hard on the eyes AND pocketbook).
Tubular
(Which really doesn’t look all that cool to me or like some typeface a surfer would write in).
And then of course there’s this type face - =:D
Just had to throw that in.
Sorry Jim
2 Comments
April 12, 2008 at 9:37 pm
Thought I was losing it. My blogroll loses the fonts and they were all a verison of Arial (is it a Sans Serif? I think so). I kept staring at your post and thinking, someone is nuts: it’s him or me. Then I clicked to your actual blog and the world made sense again.
April 13, 2008 at 10:07 am
Sam,
I have been interested in different fonts at different periods of my life, but in the end am rather oblivious to them and tend to go for those I find the most functional, which by definition means readable. Currently that is boring old Times New Roman for normal text (because it is more readable, even if less “stylish”), and Microsoft’s excellent Consolas for viewing and writing programs on LCD screens with ClearType turned on (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolas). Consolas is a weird combination of serif and sans serif. If it wasn’t monospaced (and Windows only) I would use it more.
Note that on Linux machines that don’t have all TrueType Microsoft fonts installed, some of your examples above come across looking the same because the browser (Firefox in my case) is forced to choose a fallback serif or sans serif font.
Leave a Reply