Do you have a favorite font?

ex
exegete77
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 3:57 pm
Platform: Mac

Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:05 am Post

I have drifted over the years.

Serifs: Adobe Garamond, Minion, and at times Lucida Bright or Palatino

I like the italics for each.


San Serif: Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Sans

Optima is a half-way font between the two groups (from my visual perspective), so can be used at times.

TC
TCole
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:59 am
Location: Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Wed Oct 24, 2007 2:55 am Post

I've long been a fan of Palatino set at 11pt. Both my novels were submitted with that font and size. Because of this thread I took a look at Georgia and there's a marked similarity. But to my eyes Palatino looks fuller and warmer somehow.

I have to say though I much prefer the italics and bold forms of Georgia to the Palatino equivalents. Now I'm torn.
Hear the voices of Canadian literature at http://www.authorsaloud.com

St
Studio717
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: California

Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:13 am Post

I love the elegance of Adobe Garamond, especially its italics, but - alas! - the x-height is just too small for daily manuscript use (ime, anyway), so I tend to go with typefaces with a larger x-height. Georgia seems to work well, and I fall back on Times New Roman a lot (as I mentioned earlier in this thread) but I haven't settled on one daily-use typeface yet.

(Still looking, in other words.)

User avatar
ptram
Posts: 956
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 3:43 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Recanati, Italy

Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:26 am Post

Just a little history note: Times New Roman is a Times clone, Microsoft created to avoid paying rights to The Times. Since on the Mac you have both, I suggest you use the original Times font.

Paolo

St
Studio717
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: California

Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:32 am Post

ptram wrote:Just a little history note: Times New Roman is a Times clone, Microsoft created to avoid paying rights to The Times. Since on the Mac you have both, I suggest you use the original Times font.

Paolo


Hi, Paolo,

Is there a perceivable difference between the two? (Just curious. I couldn't see a difference in a quick look just now.)

User avatar
ptram
Posts: 956
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 3:43 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Recanati, Italy

Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:40 am Post

Studio717 wrote:Is there a perceivable difference between the two? (Just curious. I couldn't see a difference in a quick look just now.)


A very subtle one. You can look at the serifs to find them. But being the goal to be a nearly identical font, you can hardly perceive any difference without careful analysis. I find the printed result more elegant under Times, but this might only be self-suggestion. Or the devil in the details really does its trick.

Paolo

User avatar
xiamenese
Posts: 4630
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 1:32 am
Platform: Mac
Location: London or Exeter, UK.

Wed Oct 24, 2007 10:17 am Post

ptram wrote:
Studio717 wrote:Is there a perceivable difference between the two? (Just curious. I couldn't see a difference in a quick look just now.)


A very subtle one. You can look at the serifs to find them. But being the goal to be a nearly identical font, you can hardly perceive any difference without careful analysis. I find the printed result more elegant under Times, but this might only be self-suggestion. Or the devil in the details really does its trick.

Paolo

Yes, it's very subtle. I prefer Times as it appears to me to be better kerned, hinted, etc. so it looks more elegant printed ... to my eye, there's a kind of coarseness about TNR which I don't like.
But I too am an Adobe Garamond Pro man at heart, though I think my preference may be replaced by Adobe Caslon Pro. But since many of the documents I handle go back to people running Chinese Windo$e boxes, I have to use Times or TNR most of the time ... and for recording scripts, I can calculate run-times better in TNR.

Mark

ex
exegete77
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 3:57 pm
Platform: Mac

Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:14 pm Post

It seems that in the past when I used Times on the Mac and exchanged with Windows users who had TNR, the font differences were usually seen in word/letter spacing, and would occasionally shift a word to a new line. Haven't used Times in a long time. Anyone have that problem?

User avatar
lenf
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:28 pm
Location: North America

Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:01 pm Post

Oooo... fonts! I still keep my copy of Adobe's Font Folio up to date, so there's a ton of them about, as well as the full catalogs from Bitstream and several other companies.

But my favorite remains Minion for print.

For elegance, though, it's hard to beat Fairfield. I was working on another project at Linotype's Hauppague NY shop where they digitized all the old fonts for Adobe. A couple of the crew were just finishing up Fairfield at the time, and I got to look through the old original font drawings for all the faces. Such beauty!

(But such odd people! Grin. I spent an afternoon working with one of the guys digitizing the font. He had built an entire room around his workstation with old Diet Coke cans.)

Hu
Hugh
Posts: 2444
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:05 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: UK

Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:14 pm Post

lenf wrote:Oooo... fonts! ...
(But such odd people! Grin. I spent an afternoon working with one of the guys digitizing the font. He had built an entire room around his workstation with old Diet Coke cans.)


Does it go with the territory? Eric Gill... :shock:

User avatar
xiamenese
Posts: 4630
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 1:32 am
Platform: Mac
Location: London or Exeter, UK.

Sat Oct 27, 2007 12:48 am Post

exegete77 wrote:It seems that in the past when I used Times on the Mac and exchanged with Windows users who had TNR, the font differences were usually seen in word/letter spacing, and would occasionally shift a word to a new line. Haven't used Times in a long time. Anyone have that problem?

Yes, definitely. That kerning difference is what makes TNR look so coarse compared with Times and can build up over a long document so that you don't just get words shifted to new lines, you can also end up with pagination differences. It's why I always use TNR in documents I need to send to a colleague, especially one using Chinese Windows.
And an added problem with Chinese Windows/Word is that when they switch between Chinese and English, the glyphs that are used are the TNR-alike Roman character set within the (Simplified) Chinese font, which are really badly kerned for the alphanumerics and which uses the punctuation characters designed for the Chinese. Chinese is monospaced with each character occupying the same horizontal (and vertical) space irrespective of number of strokes ... and that includes the punctuation. So the text ends up full of blank space ... university' s instead of university's. Horrendous!
Mark

User avatar
MarcustheBlacksmith
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:48 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:12 am Post

Oh, I adore Hoefler Text. Hoefler text regular face is a relatively standard serif font - upstanding and at least on par with Garamond Pro - but it's when you, fingers trembling, hit Cmd-i, that Hoefler text really shines. It's got the best, hands down the best italic face there is. I get all shivery just talking about it (and yes I'm aware of how silly it is to be in love with a medium rather than a message, but what the hey).

It's actually a shame that I don't write the sort of fantasy that italicises every second made-up word. Alas, instead I find myself thinking 'now how can I fit the some latin genus name into this chapter on fish spawning...'

That being said, there's another font, erm, Fangsong? It's an Adobe font, I'm quite fond of it, for regular face stuff.

On the web, where fonts are limited, I find a nice generic sans like Helvetica works a treat.

User avatar
xiamenese
Posts: 4630
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 1:32 am
Platform: Mac
Location: London or Exeter, UK.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:33 pm Post

MarcustheBlacksmith wrote:Oh, I adore Hoefler Text. Hoefler text regular face is a relatively standard serif font - upstanding and at least on par with Garamond Pro - but it's when you, fingers trembling, hit Cmd-i, that Hoefler text really shines. It's got the best, hands down the best italic face there is. I get all shivery just talking about it (and yes I'm aware of how silly it is to be in love with a medium rather than a message, but what the hey).

It's actually a shame that I don't write the sort of fantasy that italicises every second made-up word. Alas, instead I find myself thinking 'now how can I fit the some latin genus name into this chapter on fish spawning...'

That being said, there's another font, erm, Fangsong? It's an Adobe font, I'm quite fond of it, for regular face stuff.

On the web, where fonts are limited, I find a nice generic sans like Helvetica works a treat.

Hmm ... Hoefler text itself is OK ... I used to use it on Keynote, but I've changed to Optima. I didn't notice anything special about the italics, though and I didn't like the old-face style numbers for what I was doing.

Fang Song? Are you also a Chinese user? Since the demise of Song with 10.4, I use Fang Song as my default, but it has one big problem ... I prepare my handouts for my classes in InDesign and export them to PDF for the students. InDesign won't export FangSong, 'cos it's not licensed to be included in the PDF, so I have a choice of Kai or Hei ... I quite like Kai, but it's not as clear as Fang Song.

On the other hand, the Roman font within Fang Song is absolutely ghastly to my eye, and it uses the Chinese punctuation with the wide spacing, so in mixed text I have to keep swapping between that and TNR.

Mark

User avatar
pink
Posts: 578
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: london
Contact:

Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:52 pm Post

I'll add mine, as no-one has mentioned it. I am very partial to a typeface called Myriad. I use it for my corporate stationery.

For websites I like Trebuchet MS or Arial. I love their narrow forms.

I really do like the default Optima in scrivener, and I've not changed it. It's also a narrow font, and has a nice clean elegance.

User avatar
lenf
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:28 pm
Location: North America

Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:15 pm Post

Poking about this morning I came upon this review by Rick LePage for the documentary Helvetica. I'm more of a Formata guy, myself, but the film sounds like fun for all font freaks...

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/creativ ... /index.php