What font do you use??

[maniac]

Silly one really, but a matter of debate in our office.

 

I always use Arial or Tahoma on pretty much any document I prepare. I think it's easier to read, and just looks cleaner and nicer and more professional

 

On the other hand, the ICT coordinator always uses Times New Roman for pretty much everything he does. I dislike this font, I think it looks very 'old' and is much more difficult to read, and I just don't think it looks as professional as Arial or Tahoma.

 

Hence at the moment, our approach is in-consistant as we each output documents in different styles.

 

What do other people think?

 

Mike.

[OutLawTorn]

I generally use Tahoma, although i don't mind Calibri (default in Office 2k7).

 

I remember being told somewhere (some aesthetics discussion in college or high school or something) that generally Serif fonts (eg Times New Roman) are meant to be better for printed text as the little serifs (the taggy bits that hang off the ends) make it easier for your eye to read from one to the next, whereas sans-serif fonts (eg Arial/Tahoma) are better for headings or on-screen text as they are much clearer.

[FN-GM]

Mostly Arial but I have started using Calibri as it is default in Office 2007.

[Joedetic]

Arial or Trebuchet depending on what the document is for.

[MkII]

Use Times New Roman or similar for headings etc on occasion as it's nicer to look at. ICT CoOrd here of the same opinion, that TNR family is the more crafted font.

 

It's what was used as standard for print wasn't it. I notice moving from text in TNR to a modern font such a relief!

 

For general print on paper or screen I like Tahoma or Trebuchet, Arial if there's nothing else, plus MS Sans Serif is a lil beauty.

 

Calibri's a beaut too - free with the Office2007 compat patch apparently

[SimpleSi]

There's another font other than Comic Sans :?:

 

regards

 

Simon

[beeswax]

You may find a useful font here

[Andrew_C]

Depends a bit on the intent. If you are going for print rather than screen, use a serif font. This provides a line for the eye to follow and makes reading easier, especially for those who find reading difficult, OR those who read quickly. Apparently it makes less difference in between. This applies to 'body text' rather than headings, annotations to illustrations etc.

 

Thus I tend to use Times, unless I'm feeling creative/bored when I might look for something different.

 

The above is NOT personal opinion, it is knowledge drawn from secondary research into the subject. Couldn't tell you 20 years on whose books I looked into though...

[webman]

The reasons for using Serif fonts in print have declinde over recent years due to more people reading and getting used to things in Sans-serif fonts on screens.

 

Personally I use Tahoma/Verdana or Gill Sans MT, can't stand those nasty Serifs

[gwendes]

Verdana here

[DevilsAdvocate]

Tahoma.

 

Rob.

[localzuk]

The reasons for using Serif fonts in print have declinde over recent years due to more people reading and getting used to things in Sans-serif fonts on screens.

 

Personally I use Tahoma/Verdana or Gill Sans MT, can't stand those nasty Serifs

 

The human eye hasn't changed over recent years though

 

So I still use a serif font such as Times New Roman on print documentation, and a Sans-serif font on screen documentation. Although, the school obsession with Comic Sans still has some say. Our school site is covered in comic sans

[SteveB_NI]

Thankfully Comic Sans seems to be on the way out here.... I even got my Interview letter written in it if I remember correctly lol!

 

I use Verdana for most documents, also Trebuchet and Tahoma, Arial Rounded is quite nice too.

[richard.thomas]

Why isn't Jokerman a choice?

[enjay]

If you are going for print rather than screen, use a serif font. This provides a line for the eye to follow and makes reading easier, especially for those who find reading difficult, OR those who read quickly.

 

The above is NOT personal opinion, it is knowledge drawn from secondary research into the subject. Couldn't tell you 20 years on whose books I looked into though...

Interesting. I've seen research that says non-serifed fonts are easier for people with dyslexia to read, something to do with more simple letter shapes, and I know dyslexics who will testify to that too.

 

Another key for dyslexics is to have text justified to the left only, not left-and-right justified, as that retains a consistent distance between words making it easier to flow from one to another.

 

Personally, I was an Arial man but have started using Calibri now that I have Office 2007, although I might change that as I don't like it small on screen, it's fine when printed though.

[Guest richard]

Verdana here

 

Same here.

[mrforgetful]

Calibi if it's Office 2007.

Century Gothic if anything else.

[webman]

The human eye hasn't changed over recent years though

 

No, it hasn't. But the way we perceive text has. If you compare Ye Olden medieval typography to modern-day material, things have changed a bit

[Joanne]

Arial all the way... so what if you use different fonts? means people know who the message is off!!

[Andrew_C]

True dyslexics may be different. The references may have been based on those within the "normal" range.

 

Personally I HATE reading body text in sans-serif fonts. It take SO much longer to read. I gave up on a Ben Elton novel. Maybe it was rubbish too, but damned hard to read.

 

One liners, quick notes, poster, headlines, whatever; use whatever looks funky, but not too many in one document please!

[localzuk]

The human eye hasn't changed over recent years though

 

No, it hasn't. But the way we perceive text has. If you compare Ye Olden medieval typography to modern-day material, things have changed a bit

 

Ye Olde medieval font was never printed... It was carefully scripted by individual men.

 

Printed font was designed in such a way to make it easy to read for the masses - ie. using serifs was intended to make it easier to read. If you speak to any offset printer they will recommend a serif font for printed work.

[enjay]

using serifs was intended to make it easier to read

I'd heard that serifs were about stone-carving - by placing the serif at the end of the line, it ensured that when you then took the main chip out, it stopped in a neat line exactly where you wanted it, rather than a jagged splintered edge. If that is the case, they have no requirement in typed text at all!

[EduTech]

I use the Default in Office 2k7 now Calibri

[localzuk]

using serifs was intended to make it easier to read

I'd heard that serifs were about stone-carving - by placing the serif at the end of the line, it ensured that when you then took the main chip out, it stopped in a neat line exactly where you wanted it, rather than a jagged splintered edge. If that is the case, they have no requirement in typed text at all!

 

Not according to the design and typography books I've read, or the plethora of sites which discuss this issue across the net. (for example, this completely non-definitive random site).

[enjay]

I guess that bit of pub trivia was rubbish then!