top | item 43591897

(no title)

Leptonmaniac | 11 months ago

Ok, it is a font alright. To me, it looks exactly as all the other fonts I have on my OS already, but I guess that's just how it is if you are not in the font bubble.

discuss

order

gherkinnn|11 months ago

I am not in *the font bubble*, but can immediately recognise, say, the Guardian by its typography alone.

It can absolutely be a part of a texts character and reducing this entire field to a *bubble* is a feeble attempt at spinning ignorance as a virtue.

nine_k|11 months ago

On the screen, in small print, you may not notice the difference between this and, say, Franklin Gothic. But in print the difference is more noticeable, even if not immediately visible without taking a closer look. If you encounter a booklet purported to be form Bank of America set in this typeface instead of Franklin Gothic, it will look very similar but you'll feel that something is slightly off.

latexr|11 months ago

Erik Spiekermann is a German typographer who gave a talk called (something to the effect of) “why do we need so many typefaces”. At one point, Erik simply shows a slide with “this is why”, in what is clearly the Marlboro font.

Fonts have different metrics which affect recognisability, legibility, and understanding. There are fonts which evoke a feeling (think heavy metal band), others which are practical (exaggerated letter forms to help dyslexia), and many many many bad fonts too, such as ones with bad kerning which make words like “therapists” read “the rapists” or “morn” read “mom”.

The fonts you have on your computer are all different and have their own strengths and weaknesses which affect you and your perception of what you read, even if you’re unaware of it.

msla|11 months ago

The dyslexia fonts don't work:

> Researchers put the font to the test, comparing it with two other popular fonts designed for legibility—Arial and Times New Roman—and discovered that the purportedly dyslexia-friendly font actually reduced reading speed and accuracy. In addition, none of the students preferred to read material in OpenDyslexic, a surprising rebuke for a font specifically designed for the task.

> In a separate 2018 study, researchers compared another popular dyslexia font—Dyslexie, which charges a fee for usage—with Arial and Times New Roman and found no benefit to reading accuracy and speed. As with the previous dyslexia font, children expressed a preference for the mainstream fonts. “All in all, the font Dyslexie, developed to facilitate the reading of dyslexic people, does not have the desired effect,” the researchers concluded. “Children with dyslexia do not read better when text is printed in the font Dyslexie than when text is printed in Arial or Times New Roman.”

https://www.edutopia.org/article/do-dyslexia-fonts-actually-...

yencabulator|11 months ago

You've given examples of fonts for branding. Those are not everyday use fonts. We don't program with heavy metal band logos.

The fonts we actually use are interchangeable, and people outside the font bubble won't even notice the differences.

kissgyorgy|11 months ago

I'm not into fonts at all either, but this looks like more crispier and more readable that I anything saw before. I don't know exactly why.