Perhaps in the general population - I think that particular eye problems
may affect one's ability to read different font faces more easily than
others. I'm astigmatic, and I haven't had an eye exam for far too
long.. found the type in the PDML book very difficult to read..
apart from its' size... I also have some difficulty reading any cursive
stuff. in terms of non serif stuff, certain words are difficult to
read in arial - like ,um, Illinois. :-)
i captioned my photos in a couple of calendars with Lucida caligraphy
and Lucida handwriting because I thought it looked nice, but I had a
hard time checking my spelling
ann
On 9/15/2011 22:38, Stan Halpin wrote:
Ann, I was a bit surprised by Mark's
earlier comment that this attitude is more opinion than scientifically
derived Truth,
or words to that effect.
I coulda' sworn that I had read a couple of articles on the topic in Human
Factors or IEEE-SMC a few decades ago. I did a quick search,
starting and ending with Wikipedia,
and found that the apparent consensus is that
there is no solid evidence one way or the other.
stan
On Sep 15, 2011, at 7:50 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
On 9/15/2011 15:03, Bob Sullivan wrote:
John,
Some years ago, 'Technology Review' changed fonts to Arial (I believe)
and stopped hyphenating words, and left justified all columns instead
of centering and padding lines to justify both left and right sides.
I find this method more enjoyable and natural. MIT, who publishes the
magazine, claimed it was technically better for the reader.
Regards, Bob S.
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:36 AM, John Coyle<jco...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
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
I recently read something on line where the opinion was put forth that san
serif fonts were fine / nice to read on line but that erif font's were easier
to read in print - especially newsprint sized print. I tend
to agree. Of course, I can't read 10 point in print without pain anyway :-)
ann
-----Original Message-----
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] 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
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
