|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Fonts (typography!) used in church
|
Ahleal V
Shipmate
# 8404
|
Posted
Hello All,
Having suffered through years of badly designed church publications - to say nothing of the wickedness of Comic Sans - in the foreseeable future the role of designing these things might inevitably fall on me.
I'm wondering if there are any fonts which you could recommend for church newsletters? Requiem HFJ is gorgeous but expensive.
x
AV
Posts: 499 | From: English Spires | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
WhyNotSmile
Shipmate
# 14126
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ahleal V:
Hello All,
Having suffered through years of badly designed church publications - to say nothing of the wickedness of Comic Sans - in the foreseeable future the role of designing these things might inevitably fall on me.
I'm wondering if there are any fonts which you could recommend for church newsletters? Requiem HFJ is gorgeous but expensive.
x
AV
Tahoma, Trebuchet, Arial all do the job... I'd never pay for a font just for a church newsletter, when there are plenty of free ones that will suffice.
--------------------
Come visit:
http://why-not-smile.blogspot.com
- you're always glad you came
Posts: 528 | From: Belfast | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
This is a really nice font but, for a church bulletin, go with those in your word processing package. I think that Times New Roman or Trebuchet works better than Arial, given the uneven lighting in many churches, but that's me. Comic Sans is of Satan, and offends the martyrs and confessors, not to mention the virgins. I'm personally fond of Narkisim and Optima, but I fear that few agree with me.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
I use easily-read lower-case Calibri for our weekly pew-sheet/bulletin, and for the majority of posters on or near our church/hall doors. For occasional posters e.g. those we put up in our local Community Centre/supermarket, advertising special services or events, I use Kristen ITC on bright yellow or orange paper (so as to stand out amidst the throng of other adverts!).
IIRC, it's widely accepted that a simple and easy-to-read lower case font is better than some of the more elaborate fonts......of which Microsoft Word (which is the source I use) has quite a variety.
Ian J.
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariston
Insane Unicorn
# 10894
|
Posted
A church bulletin should be set like any other short piece of text that's going to be printed on a low resolution (well, for print) laser printer on basic, often colored, paper. Keep things simple, keep them clean, keep it on the conservative side as regards taste, and, when in doubt, use Caslon. Also keep in mind that you're going to want to be considerate of older folk with eyes that don't read small print like they used to—set everything in 14 point type or larger, consider widening your leading by a point or two (if the situation warrants it) and don't mess with the kerning! If you run out of space, use the Editor's Red Pen of Doom and cut words, but don't shrink the type.
I, personally, generally avoid Gothic or geometric san serif faces in print applications like this; while they've been extraordinarily popular in recent years because of their simplicity, slick contemporary feel, and relevance to electronic applications at ultralow resolutions (note the display face here on the Ship), they're not as readable when you're actually dealing with blocks of text, nor do they have quite the same "old familiar feel" that a good garalde or even early modern face will. Times is hackneyed, and really only useful for setting lots of text in a small space—which is what it was designed for, after all. It's not especially readable, though, which is part of why people have been moving away from it more and more. Caslon is familiar to many people, but many commercial (and especially free) Caslons I've seen have really wonky leading and incomplete character sets—which is a shame, since you won't find anything better for setting short paragraphs of text. Garamond is a classic, doesn't take up too much space, is as readable as they come, and always a good decision, especially for longer blocks of text. As far as common typefaces go, it and Minion are the ones I see book designers using most often.
Of course, if you really want to get into this, see if you can track down a copy of Robert Bringhurst's The Elements of Typographic Style. It's far and away the best book on the topic I've ever seen, for reasons that would take me far too much gushing to explain here.
tl;dr: stick with serifs, avoid TNR, 14 point, find Bringhurst now.
--------------------
“Therefore, let it be explained that nowhere are the proprieties quite so strictly enforced as in men’s colleges that invite young women guests, especially over-night visitors in the fraternity houses.” Emily Post, 1937.
Posts: 6849 | From: The People's Republic of Balcones | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
The Book of Common Prayer '79 is in Sabon. Garamond is the closest standard font on Word, and thus the best choice for liturgical materials.
[ 15. January 2014, 19:54: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Garamond is not bad either, but perhaps for some not quite as easy to read as Arial, Tahoma or Trebuchet. TNR is not at all easy unless you increase it to at least 14 point. Comic Sans is legible and does have its uses in children's material.
The Requiem is attractive, but has 2 counts against it. You have to buy it - and with so many others free,, can you justify* it? And the language of the site! Weasel words everywhere turned me away.
We use the New English Hymnal. Not sure what font that is, but it is very faint and not at all easy to read for those of us of advancing years.
*No pun intended
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Common Worship, unaccountably and counter-intuitively (given that most people seem to say that serif fonts are more legible), has gone for Gill Sans. Which is a very attractive font but not, to my mind, particularly suited to large blocks of text. The ASB was set in Palatino which is OK. I like Calisto which you don't often come across but it is towards the top of the list on my Mac and is very readable.
If I was in charge of these things I would decree Gill Sans for the church noticeboard, and maybe for section headings in liturgical books (I might use Gill Sans Light for rubrics and non-liturgical stuff like bulletins) ; and a simple but dignified serif font for liturgical texts. Garamond, Caslon or Baskerville are all acceptable but Times New Roman is overdone and hackneyed and makes me cringe. Comic Sans and any form of mock-medieval 'gothick' or pseudo-renaissance calligraphy should be banned.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
We recently did a trial edition of a document I have some responsibility for, setting the same block of text in 5 or 6 different fonts, filtered from a bigger list. We canvassed our usual readers on their preferences. Garamond won easily.
The problem with Times NR is its over-use really. It seems to add a general feel of "technical report" to everything.
[ 15. January 2014, 20:14: Message edited by: Honest Ron Bacardi ]
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
From the POV of someone who struggles to read in dim light and needs reading glasses, I'd suggest avoiding serif fonts altogether unless your church (I'm assuming most people will initially at least glance at the newsletter there) is brightly lit. And what may appear adequate to you may not be to the older generation. It might be useful to test some font samples on someone with less good eyesight and get their opinion.
Calibri is nice though you do have to bump up the font size a bit. Verdana is also clear and easy to read and Gill Sans is another attractive sans serif font. Trebuchet and Maiandra are slightly less formal.
When you make your final choice of font, make sure it's capable of doing bold, italic, and any special characters you may need. There are literally hundreds of fonts out there, free as well as purchasable, on the internet if you don't like the alternatives your computer offers, but some only offer the bare minimum of the alphabet in roman.
[ 15. January 2014, 20:22: Message edited by: Ariel ]
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lily pad
Shipmate
# 11456
|
Posted
Keep in mind that if you are working with others and sharing the newsletter via email as a PDF, there are still many fonts that don't appear properly to others. I have had difficulties with this when I have chosen more unique fonts.
--------------------
Sloppiness is not caring. Fussiness is caring about the wrong things. With thanks to Adeodatus!
Posts: 2468 | From: Truly Canadian | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I'd say:-
Serif - Garamond every time.
If you really don't like it, you could try Gentium, 'the Christian font' which is encouraged by SIL. Baskerville is nice but a bit wispy and old fashioned when it comes to reading it easily.
Sans - Calibri or Lucida (but I think that may be Mac only). Not Arial, which is the boring Sans equivalent of TNR. Tahoma and Trebuchet are both OK.
For liturgical use it really has to be Gill Sans, whatever your personal views because that's what Common Worship is printed in.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
For liturgical use it really has to be Gill Sans, whatever your personal views because that's what Common Worship is printed in.
There are many of us who might use fonts in various liturgical contexts for whom the font in which Common Worship is printed is neither here nor there.
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
I think that Times New Roman or Trebuchet works better than Arial, given the uneven lighting in many churches, but that's me.
To cater for those who have visual impairment the various charities for the blind say that sans serif fonts should be used. That rules out Times New Roman
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Ariston
Insane Unicorn
# 10894
|
Posted
Okay, if you must do san serif, then stay away from Ariel (no, not that one, she's perfectly nice) and go with one meant for text and visibility, like Helvetica light (the ultra light, while quite contemporary, can be a bit much and might be hard to read; its time is also soon to pass, I'd guess) or Century Gothic. At all costs, avoid Optima. While it's an amazingly subtle and beautiful face if done in offset lithography or (be still, my heart!) metal type, the delicate curves and angles get lost on laser printers and computer screens, making it less legible and, frankly, less beautiful. Hermann Zaph faces (Palatino, Optima, Zaphino, Zaph Chancery) are very, very subtle and, especially for Optima and Zaphino, need to be handled with care. If you're doing a church bulletin, I doubt people are going to give you enough lead time to individually select each individual character and stylistic alternate; use something that looks good even when abused and is hastily amended three minutes before the service. Garamond and Baskerville both look liturgical*, while Helvetica and Century Gothic are classic sans serif faces, albeit very different ones, that can still be read in text settings.
*We recently had a Cardinal Newman icon and printing implement blessing at work (though for the fax machine, I think an exorcism would have been more appropriate); the Ordinariate officiant informed us that he had chosen Baskerville for the order of service handouts because it was both English and properly liturgical, so the Blessed John Henry would have approved.
--------------------
“Therefore, let it be explained that nowhere are the proprieties quite so strictly enforced as in men’s colleges that invite young women guests, especially over-night visitors in the fraternity houses.” Emily Post, 1937.
Posts: 6849 | From: The People's Republic of Balcones | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
A lot of this is cultural. Some typefaces look more American, some more British, some European.
Helvetica (at least some of its many variants) is a good readble standard sans face, if a bit boring and dated. It shouts 1950s or 60s - a sort of high-tech chrome European 60s rather than a rock-and-roll one. Arial is a second-rate Helvetica rip-off made unusably boring by its use as the default for Microsoft Word so everyone associates it with tedious work documents.
Comic Sans has no valid uses. If you find yourself thinking that it does, take thar as a sign from God that you are not called to edify the church through typography.
Gill Sans is wonderful but very English. It has been the normal face of Church of England liturgy for a while. Also heavily used by the BBC. I always use it for the body of text in service sheets when I can. There is really no other choice Sometimes with other faces for headers.
Serif faces are not neccesarily more readable than sans in cheaply reproduced documents and can be much worse at small sizes. 14 point is good, 12 borderline, anything less and sans is safer. The various Times Roman faces are also overused and overreminiscent of work word documents.
Microsofts other standard faces are much better, because less overused - Georgia and Verdana and Tahoma and Trebuchet all look better than Arial or Times and you can't beat the price. Trebuchet is another one of those rather mid-century faces that looks a bit English.
[deleted duplicate post]
[ 16. January 2014, 08:51: Message edited by: seasick ]
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
churchgeek
Have candles, will pray
# 5557
|
Posted
Also, you all probably know this, but it has to be said: for a newsletter, use no more than two different fonts: one for headlines, the other for text.
Websites like this one can be helpful in choosing combinations.
Here's another, but it doesn't show you the type faces, only gives their names. But you can use it to get suggestions for a font to pair with one you're thinking of using.
And ken's advice,
quote:
Comic Sans has no valid uses. If you find yourself thinking that it does, take that as a sign from God that you are not called to edify the church through typography.
is going in the quotes file.
[ 16. January 2014, 02:52: Message edited by: churchgeek ]
--------------------
I reserve the right to change my mind.
My article on the Virgin of Vladimir
Posts: 7773 | From: Detroit | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Ariel
Shipmate
# 58
|
Posted
The Microsoft default on my pc uses Calibri as the main font with Cambria, which is a serif font, as the heading font. It's actually quite a good, clear and legible combination. The Cambria has a nice bold look to it and makes a good heading font.
If you pick two fonts that you like which you think will work well together you probably don't really need any more for your newsletter, because you should also have the options of bold and italic to add variety within those, plus altering the size, adding shaded panels where necessary, etc etc. Quite a lot can be achieved with just two typefaces.
Garamond (serif font) is one of my personal favourites but it is quite light, and depending on which manufacturer has supplied it, can vary more than you expect, from the pleasing to the difficult to read. Sabon is a good all-purpose serif font as is Baskerville, and both are mainstream choices for book publishers, partly because Sabon is one of the few fonts that can cope with a wide range of special characters and diacritics.
Posts: 25445 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
....er......just what is so awful about Comic Sans?
.......if necessary, I'll get me coat........
Ian J.
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by churchgeek:
Also, you all probably know this, but it has to be said: for a newsletter, use no more than two different fonts: one for headlines, the other for text.
Websites like this one can be helpful in choosing combinations.
Here's another, but it doesn't show you the type faces, only gives their names. But you can use it to get suggestions for a font to pair with one you're thinking of using.
Thank you for those links. I'm probably a bit boring but I think there's usually quite a good case for sticking to only one font, and just using combinations of size and the bold and italic versions of itself for headings, variety etc.
A good font draws attention neither to itself nor to the claims of the person who chose it, to be clever, creative or a dtp version of Linda Snell. quote:
And ken's advice,
quote:
Comic Sans has no valid uses. If you find yourself thinking that it does, take that as a sign from God that you are not called to edify the church through typography.
is going in the quotes file.
Brill. That gets 2 ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) s
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
....er......just what is so awful about Comic Sans?
I wouldn't say it's awful in and of itself, but it's awful in any context other than on cards telling children about a birthday party.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Comic Sans is actually used a lot by those involved in Special Educational Needs provision since it is one of the easiest fonts for those with reading difficulties to read. This is because the lowercase 'a' is formed similarly to how one would write it.
Good to know that those with reading difficulties aren't welcome in church.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Comic Sans is actually used a lot by those involved in Special Educational Needs provision since it is one of the easiest fonts for those with reading difficulties to read. This is because the lowercase 'a' is formed similarly to how one would write it.
Good to know that those with reading difficulties aren't welcome in church.
In the canvassing exercise I referred to earlier, there were several people with visual impairment/reading difficulties. One of the reasons we went with Garamond was because they all preferred it - though it was also the general preference too. Not a church document BTW.
ExclamationMark wrote: quote:
To cater for those who have visual impairment the various charities for the blind say that sans serif fonts should be used. That rules out Times New Roman
We checked that. Most say either can be used, some say that san serif is better for onscreen work and serif for printed work (I think that's current government Office for Disabilities recommendation). RNIB says either provided the characters are distinct.
But in any event, there are potentially many different reasons why people may have impaired reading ability. You'll need to ask them specifically, and not assume a one size fits all solution is going to work.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oblatus:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
....er......just what is so awful about Comic Sans?
I wouldn't say it's awful in and of itself, but it's awful in any context other than on cards telling children about a birthday party.
- er - WOW! That was almost word-for-word what I was going to post.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Higgs Bosun
Shipmate
# 16582
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Comic Sans is actually used a lot by those involved in Special Educational Needs provision since it is one of the easiest fonts for those with reading difficulties to read. This is because the lowercase 'a' is formed similarly to how one would write it.
Good to know that those with reading difficulties aren't welcome in church.
(I would say that the lower case 'a' in comic sans is insufficiently different from the lower case 'o'. Letters being distinct is more important than similarity with how they might be written - and handwriting is not generally noted for legibility.)
What I would suggest is showing some samples to those in the church who might have difficulty reading. We did not do this in my church when the format of the bulletin was changed, and some of the older folk with weaker eyes complained.
Posts: 313 | From: Near the Tidal Thames | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
incidentally - in case anyone thinks font choice is all a bit geeky, even if your audience has no disabilities -
Read this.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Comic Sans is actually used a lot by those involved in Special Educational Needs provision since it is one of the easiest fonts for those with reading difficulties to read.
I'm pretty sure it isn't. Any real research?
In fact its rather bad for continuous text because its so jerky. It's meant for short lines and captions - it is of course a comic-book face though there are better ones - and tends to throw the eye badly if used for multiple lines.
quote:
This is because the lowercase 'a' is formed similarly to how one would write it.
Same as who would write it? Different handwriting styles have different forms of the letters. It varies hugely between countries, generations, schools, and individuals. Educational fashions change. I was taught two quite different handwriting styles at school and lots of letters, including "a", were different between them.
Anyway, there are plenty of other typefaces with similar single-storey "a"s. Starting with Futura, one of the best-known of all modern typefaces. And most classic italic faces as well. And others.
As for the snarky comments about people not bed welcome in church, readability is exactly why we care about type so much.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
busyknitter
Shipmate
# 2501
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Comic Sans is actually used a lot by those involved in Special Educational Needs provision since it is one of the easiest fonts for those with reading difficulties to read.
I'm pretty sure it isn't. Any real research?
Can't say I've noticed it at my son's school.
I have been trying for two years to think up a tactful way to ask our otherwise admirable PCC secretary to stop producing minutes in Comic bloody Sans. ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
Posts: 903 | From: The Wool Basket | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
The DejaVu family of fonts is completely free:
- Sans: Book, Bold, Oblique, Bold Oblique, Condensed, Condensed Bold, Condensed Oblique and Condensed Bold Oblique, Extralight
- Serif: Book, Bold, Italic, Bold Italic, Condensed, Condensed Bold, Condensed Italic and Condensed Bold Italic
- Mono: Book, Bold, Oblique, Bold Oblique
They are very "clean" fonts and cover as wide a range of characters as possible. The latter might make them very attractive in a Church context: you can use the same font for all sort of "weird" letter (Greek, Cyrillic, Coptic, Georgian, all manner of accents, diacritical marks, phonemes, ...).
I often use DejaVu Sans Mono when programming computer code, that's where I know these fonts from. Many Linux installations have them preinstalled.
[ 16. January 2014, 18:24: Message edited by: IngoB ]
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Higgs Bosun
Shipmate
# 16582
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Comic Sans is actually used a lot by those involved in Special Educational Needs provision since it is one of the easiest fonts for those with reading difficulties to read.
I'm pretty sure it isn't. Any real research?
In fact its rather bad for continuous text because its so jerky. It's meant for short lines and captions - it is of course a comic-book face though there are better ones - and tends to throw the eye badly if used for multiple lines.
There is research on the readability of different type styles, if not actual typefaces. For instance, after the issues with our own bulletin, I went in search of the idea I had heard that serif typefaces were easier to read (particularly for body text) than sans serif typefaces. The theory was that the serifs make the letters more distinct, and therefore easier for the eye+brain to distinguish. However, it seems that this is not the case, and there is no particular difference in readability.
However, your point about different fonts being suitable for different places in a typeset document is very valid. Up-thread someone has already made the observation that Times Roman is intended for narrow dense columns of text - as in a newspaper.
Posts: 313 | From: Near the Tidal Thames | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
You find very few novels set in any sans serif typeface, and if you try to read more than a page at a time of such you'll see why. Or at least to my mind: it is much more tiring. Sans serif is fine for captions, short paragraphs and such like (hence tolerable for liturgical use though I find a good serif font easier on the eye when leading services)
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I've never seen any novel set in Comic Sans.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
JH
Apprentice
# 17310
|
Posted
It enrages me that my local police send out their formal legal representations on applications for licences for pubs, clubs etc in Comic Sans.
They even use Comic Sans when requesting that a licence is reviewed because of a spate of stabbings and brawls.
Posts: 4 | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JH:
It enrages me that my local police send out their formal legal representations on applications for licences for pubs, clubs etc in Comic Sans.
They even use Comic Sans when requesting that a licence is reviewed because of a spate of stabbings and brawls.
omg. omg.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
The Chief Constable should promptly arrest himself for criminal breach of taste. And Lesé-Majesté, as I am appalled one of Her Majesty's servants would be so crude in representations on her behalf in an official capacity.
[ 17. January 2014, 01:32: Message edited by: Sober Preacher's Kid ]
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
Entertaining though it is to discuss the misuses of C*mic S*ns, this thread is here to debate the use of typography for worship handouts in church. Please try to keep the contributions useful where possible!
Your cooperation is, as ever, appreciated.
dj_ordinaire, Eccles host
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
C***c S**s isn't the only font that isn't suitable for serious use. Curlz may be OK for an invitation to a children's party, but not for service sheets or the Parish Magazine. I'm not too sure about Harrington or Mistral, or any fonts that are supposed to look like either felt tip pens or copper plate handwriting with flourishes.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Yes. Avoid any "script" typefaces or imitation handwriting. Used unthinkingly they are unreadable. Used professionally they at best make your text look like the labels of cheap supermarket own-brand clothing lines aimed at older middle-aged women.
And if you don't believe me on that, take a look at this page on the BBC website which includes a disastrous example of corporate rebranding when Gatwick Airport replaced a rather boring but functional logo in Frutiger with a dismal piece of namby-pamby crap in some utterly inappropriate fake-handwriting typeface.
Apparently their marketing droids said the old logo was too "uncompromising". And Frutiger is one of those mid-20th-century high-tech Teutonic shiny moderne typefaces. Well, personally I want air travel to be uncompromising, efficient, modern, fast, and safe. Leave soft, cuddly, homely, and friendly to the railways where they belong.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fineline
Shipmate
# 12143
|
Posted
I know it's trendy to make fun of comic sans, but I genuinely find it one of the easiest fonts to read. I think what people are calling its jerkiness is part of the reason for that. The letters are very easily distinguished from each other by the various angles. With the kind of fonts that people normally consider to be more appropriate, the letters are much more similar to each other - at a glance, an 'a' and an 'e' can both look like a circle with a horizontal line through it. A page of Comic Sans is so much easier on the eyes, I find. I have Irlen Syndrome, which is apparently quite common in people on the autism spectrum and also in dyslexic people. I spent quite a while trying to work out the easiest fonts for myself, and if I ever have the option of altering the font on a webpage, I always change it to Comic Sans, or the Mac alternative (which I have a slight preference for, because the letters are slightly wider).
Just thought I'd speak in favour of Comic Sans, because it always gets a bad rap! I'm not expecting churches to use it in their bulletins, but I certainly wouldn't complain if they did.
Posts: 2375 | From: England | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fineline
Shipmate
# 12143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
You find very few novels set in any sans serif typeface, and if you try to read more than a page at a time of such you'll see why. Or at least to my mind: it is much more tiring.
It was used in The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time. I found it incredibly easy to read, but apparently neurotypical people find it hard. There was a Guardian article about it: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2004/may/08/markhaddon
But it's worth bearing in mind that not everyone finds the same fonts easy to read, and there may well be people on the autism spectrum in any church.
Posts: 2375 | From: England | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fineline:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
You find very few novels set in any sans serif typeface, and if you try to read more than a page at a time of such you'll see why. Or at least to my mind: it is much more tiring.
It was used in The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time. ....
I'd forgotten that: another reason why I| disliked the book, I suppose.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
crunt
Shipmate
# 1321
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Comic Sans is actually used a lot by those involved in Special Educational Needs provision since it is one of the easiest fonts for those with reading difficulties to read. This is because the lowercase 'a' is formed similarly to how one would write it.
Zamyatin is better.
--------------------
QUIZ: Bible
QUIZ: world religions
LTL Discussion
languagespider.com
Posts: 269 | From: Up country in the middle of Malaysia | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
A nice clear and reasonably dignified font: reminds me of spelling cards and so on from primary school. Don't know how good it would be for extended blocks of text, but then, apart from I suppose the Creed and possibly bits of the Eucharistic Prayer (CofE/CinW background showing here) there aren't normally that many of them in a service sheet, are there?
[ 17. January 2014, 16:48: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
We try to explain about fonts to wedding couples and the like.
Best/Worst example looked beautiful - but was almost unreadable: all italics, in tasteful grey on a cream background and at something like 10 point for headings, 9 for text - dreadful.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by crunt:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Comic Sans is actually used a lot by those involved in Special Educational Needs provision since it is one of the easiest fonts for those with reading difficulties to read. This is because the lowercase 'a' is formed similarly to how one would write it.
Zamyatin is better.
Some of those letters look a little weird to me (the "s"s arege ugly, the "9" squashed, and where did they get that lower-case "t" from?) and the whole things a bit stencil-like. Also a bit of a 1/I/l problem.
I've never used it, but this Sassoon Primary typeface looks pretty much exactly like the letter forms kids are taught to write in school. Whether or not that helps poor readers I do not know.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JH:
It enrages me that my local police send out their formal legal representations on applications for licences for pubs, clubs etc in Comic Sans.
They even use Comic Sans when requesting that a licence is reviewed because of a spate of stabbings and brawls.
Does the chief wear a red nose, a fright wig and size 19DD boots?
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
