[comp.fonts] Fonts at 300 dpi

clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) (11/09/90)

In article <6C$^32+@rpi.edu> kibo@pawl.rpi.edu (James 'Kibo' Parry) writes:
>
>Some other Adobe fonts that I think look nice at 300dpi are Palatino
>(with its nice italics) and Optima (one of the more readable sans-serif
>...
>

Aaauuughhh! Don't get me wrong--I *love* Optima. I think Hermann Zapf is
a god and any type he does is okay by me. But please, PLEASE don't ruin
Optima by printing it in text sizes (10-12 points) at 300 dpi. All the
beautiful subtlety of that face, the swells at the ends of the strokes
that make Optima the sans-serif face in a class by itself--they just
go away at those sizes.  May I suggest, instead, Univers? I personally
find it boring, but it holds up well at small sizes.

I saw some "presentations graphics" recently that were done in Kabel, and
they looked terrific. Kabel has always struck me, from the font catalog
samples at least, as one of those faces with too much personality for its
own good, but I have revised my opinion after seeing these extremely
stylish charts.

And a third suggestion: If you want the feel of a sans-serif but don't
want to sacrifice readability or interest, try one of the square serifs.
Glypha is one I've been using a lot lately. It has the crisp, no-nonsense
quality of a sans, but more fun to look at and less intimidating too.


Oh, and I cast my vote in favor of the diamond-shaped dots in Goudy. :-)

--Kathy




...........................................................................
:   Kathy Strong               :  "Try our Hubble-Rita: just one shot,     :
:  (Clouds moving slowly)      :   and everything's blurry"                :
:   clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu  :                           --El Arroyo     :

gwangung@milton.u.washington.edu (Roger Tang) (11/09/90)

In article <39371@ut-emx.uucp> clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) writes:
!May I suggest, instead, Univers? I personally
!find it boring, but it holds up well at small sizes.

	Well, I use Univers a lot---but then again, I got it on a fire sale
with Franklin Gothic and News Gothic.  I sorta think it depends on what
exactly you're going to use them for.....What looks awful as text may work
quite fine as display......


!And a third suggestion: If you want the feel of a sans-serif but don't
!want to sacrifice readability or interest, try one of the square serifs.
!Glypha is one I've been using a lot lately. It has the crisp, no-nonsense
!quality of a sans, but more fun to look at and less intimidating too.

	Hmmmmm......I'll look into this one.....

!Oh, and I cast my vote in favor of the diamond-shaped dots in Goudy. :-)

	Well, I got this on sale, too.......but I agree...a classy font.

	BTW, I tend to use Lucida Bold Italic for heads and display text;
I can't put my finger on it, but that particular font has a boldness and
jauntiness that the regular Lucida Bold and other display fonts I have
can't seem to match.....

dkletter@adobe.COM (SUGAR in their vitamins?) (11/09/90)

In article <39371@ut-emx.uucp> clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong)
writes:

>Aaauuughhh! Don't get me wrong--I *love* Optima. I think Hermann Zapf is
>a god and any type he does is okay by me. But please, PLEASE don't ruin
>Optima by printing it in text sizes (10-12 points) at 300 dpi. All the
>beautiful subtlety of that face, the swells at the ends of the strokes
>that make Optima the sans-serif face in a class by itself--they just
>go away at those sizes.

not to mention the slight angle of the face is lost at smaller point sizes
on laserwriters... of course, there's something to be said for others
judgements getting in the way of intersting design...

>May I suggest, instead, Univers? I personally find it boring, but it holds
>up well at small sizes.

boring? geez you like Optima and you can't appreciate a typeface that was
geometrically designed? Adrain Frutiger is an amazing type designer and
the Univers fonts remain one of my favourites.

of course, there's always Franklin Gothic (font of Andy Warhol's INTERVIEW
magazine!) which holds up very nicely.

>I saw some "presentations graphics" recently that were done in Kabel, and
>they looked terrific.

while i like Kabel (pronounced Ka-ble not Ka-BELL as so many do), i find it
to be a font in need of a specific usage.
 
>And a third suggestion: If you want the feel of a sans-serif but don't
>want to sacrifice readability or interest, try one of the square serifs.

you mean, Egyptian typefaces?

in any case, if you are looking for PostScript typefaces that were designed
with laserprinting in mind, check out the following (which i have not seen
mentioned yet):

	Utopia (which i think is a very beautiful text face)
	Utopia Expert

	Minion (again, a great text face)
	Minion Expert

	all the Helvetica Neue's (and there are quite a few to choose
	from now)

later. --d


-- 
Yes.  Beautiful, wonderful nature.  Hear it sing to us: *snap*  Yes.  natURE.

clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) (11/09/90)

In article <8078@adobe.UUCP> dkletter@adobe.UUCP (SUGAR in their vitamins?) writes:
>
>boring? geez you like Optima and you can't appreciate a typeface that was
>geometrically designed? Adrain Frutiger is an amazing type designer and
>the Univers fonts remain one of my favourites.
>
I stand by my guns. Univers is boooo-ring.  :-)

>of course, there's always Franklin Gothic (font of Andy Warhol's INTERVIEW
>magazine!) which holds up very nicely.
>
Yes, I was thinking of FG when I started my posting but it escaped my thoughts
before I'd finished my diatribe on laserprinting Optima at small sizes...
One of FG's many virtues is that it makes a much better headline face than
Helvetica, for those who like to do sans headlines with serif body copy in
newsletters/newspapers. 

>>And a third suggestion: If you want the feel of a sans-serif but don't
>>want to sacrifice readability or interest, try one of the square serifs.
>
>you mean, Egyptian typefaces?
>
Heh, I'm not sure I'm ready for a thread on "the PROPER way to classify type"--
that one is nearly as arbitrary as "the best computer" :-).  I personally
think the word "Egyptian," while historically accurate, has so little to do with
what those faces are all about that I just don't use it. I'll grant you that
"square serif" can technically include Clarendons and such, as well as the
"Egyptians" such as Glypha, Memphis, and Lubalin Graph. How's about a compro-
mise? Let's call them Slab Serifs--after all, THEY do (points to Font and 
Function with a pious expression). 

(And a wink.)

--Kathy


-- 
...........................................................................
:   Kathy Strong               :  "Try our Hubble-Rita: just one shot,     :
:  (Clouds moving slowly)      :   and everything's blurry"                :
:   clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu  :                           --El Arroyo     :
:..........................................................................:

dkletter@adobe.COM (SUGAR in their vitamins?) (11/10/90)

In article <39436@ut-emx.uucp> clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) writes:
>I stand by my guns. Univers is boooo-ring.  :-)

to each his own... "do as you will, you always do..." 2:^o

>One of FG's many virtues is that it makes a much better headline face than
>Helvetica, for those who like to do sans headlines with serif body copy in
>newsletters/newspapers. 

i think it can work very well as either a headline or a text face, but
then again, my design interests and directions lean more to the avante
garde look so a person with more conservative outlook might frown at this
type of usage.

>mise? Let's call them Slab Serifs--after all, THEY do (points to Font and 
>Function with a pious expression). 

and you believe everything that's written in F&F?? actually, i tend to
mistakenly lump many Egyptian and Slab Serif fonts together, so the
compromise is fine with me.

and now, back to work for me. --d

-- 
Yes.  Beautiful, wonderful nature.  Hear it sing to us: *snap*  Yes.  natURE.