Font Suggestion

Rym

We have a web application that is used to configure our systems (I'm being purposefully vague). For aesthetic reasons, including narrowness of long configuration items, the developers used a sans serif font. Particularly, I realize now that they used one where I and l are not in any way differentiated.

What font should I use?

Apreche

We have a web application that is used to configure our systems (I'm being purposefully vague). For aesthetic reasons, including narrowness of long configuration items, the developers used a sans serif font. Particularly, I realize now that they used one where I and l are not in any way differentiated.

What font should I use?

If it's a web application, you don't have many font choices.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_fonts_for_the_Web

Kate Monster

Of that list, I prefer Trebuchet MS followed by Georgia. However, I am not terribly invested in any particular font.

Dr. Timo

Andale Mono FTWDamn, that's not Andalé. Damn you to hell Courier!

Loganator456

I prefer Arial and Sans Serif to be quite honest.

Rochelle

I like Verdana or Trebuchet MS.

...

What font should I use?

Helvetica, your preferred sans-serif font, a fallback on the system sans-serif default. That should do it.

Victor Frost

I prefer Sans-Serif fonts for most text, but any code or code-esque text must be in courier.

Viga

I like Trebuchet MS.

Dr. Timo

I like Trebuchet MS.

I built a Trebuchet:

lobs potatoes about 50 meters.

theknoxinator

I Courier New.</font> But it doesn't really make for a good reading font. I've always used Times New Roman, though Arial for the web is fine.

Kate Monster

Timo, that is so nifty!

Erwin

I am currently looking for another job (since my contract is about to expire on December 21st). So I am trying new fonts for my resume. What kind of font would you guys recommend?

Kate Monster

I am currently looking for another job (since my contract is about to expire on December 21st). So I am trying new fonts for my resume. What kind of font would you guys recommend?

It depends on the aesthetic you prefer: traditional, "fancy", contemporary, simple/to-the-point, etc.
So many jobs don't even look at printed resumes these days, most simply accept it electronically in which case their settings often determine the font. The issue of style is almost moot at this point.

Lyddi

One of my crazy typographer design teachers insisted that Helvetica is the awesomest most trendy font to use these days. We had to do everything in that font. I think it actually started to grow on me because I still use it every now and then. Otherwise I use Verdana (for docs) or Arial (for web).

If there is anything I learned in that class, it's this: Never use Comic Sans! (Or you will die a terrible death and/or the design people will shun you forever).

...

I prefer Sans-Serif fonts for most text

Stating the obvious much. Sans-serif is THE kind of typeface you should use on the web. Serif goes on paper, monospace for

any code or code-esque text

One of my crazy typographer design teachers insisted that Helvetica is the most awesome, most trendy font to use these days.

He's not crazy, just very close to being completely right. It's a very good font, very readable, clear and consistent.

I've always used Times New Roman ... for the web

WHY?! "For the web" is implied, the question is centred on online usage. Why would you bother mentioning Times New Roman for anything other than at most a huge header, on the web.

If there is anything I learned in that class, it's this: Never use Comic Sans! (Or you will die a terrible death and/or the design people will shun you forever).

I never understood the appeal of Comic Sans and the resulting overuse of it. It's a COMIC font, don't fucking use it outside of comics. It's in the damned name. Can anyone explain to me why it is popular at all?

I am currently looking for another job (since my contract is about to expire on December 21st). So I am trying new fonts for my resume. What kind of font would you guys recommend?

A font that's inconspicuous and that you like, serif for print, sans-serif for digital and force it in a PDF, sending word files around makes your time spent on finding a particular font (that won't get noticed) wasted. Though that's probably useless advice since you would've used PDFs anyway.

Dr. Timo

Serif goes on paper

Actually that's just a relic from the days of crappy printing presses. There is all sorts of science that tells us sans serif fonts are better for reading, period. I'm typesetting my PhD in sans serif.

Apreche

Actually that's just a relic from the days of crappy printing presses. There is all sorts of science that tells us sans serif fonts are better for reading, period. I'm typesetting my PhD in sans serif.

Everything I've read seems to suggest that serif is better for reading. Here's one article that I have read recently. http://www.vcarrer.com/2009/10/serif-vs-sans-serif-legibility.html

...

Actually that's just a relic from the days of crappy printing presses. There is all sorts of science that tells us sans serif fonts are better for reading, period.

How are serifs a relic from crappy printing presses? All I have heard is that serif is better for reading due to being more distinct, example as in Scott's link. Sans-serif is just adviced for on-screen text because the DPI difference between monitors and paper is humongous.

Railith

Use windings.

Dr. Timo

Actually that's just a relic from the days of crappy printing presses. There is all sorts of science that tells us sans serif fonts are better for reading, period. I'm typesetting my PhD in sans serif.

Everything I've read seems to suggest that serif is better for reading. Here's one article that I have read recently.http://www.vcarrer.com/2009/10/serif-vs-sans-serif-legibility.html

Scott, you googled "serif vs sans serif readability" and read the first item. Indeed, "everything you read" favors serif fonts if that everything is one graphic designers (clearly stated) opinion.

If you had bothered to read at least also the second google result, you would have found a much more in depth and scientific analysis of the question including a boatload of references to peer reviewed scientific articles. Specifically, the writer explains how a lot of the "serif fonts are better" studies are flawed or highly suspect due to various randyness. Now, to be fair, there is no conclusive evidence for either font being a-priori better. Indeed, there are so many variables that depending on font size, the font itself and variations within a font family (bold, italics etc) either font type can be shown to be better. The piece did not mention e.g. a study by Dyson [1] which showed that for long scientific reading (focused on information retrieval, skipping back and forth to references / tables / graphs etc) sans serif is clearly preferred by the subjects (but does not improve performance significantly). In general, sans serif fonts are found to be preferred in the majority of studies (look e.g. at the preferences of people in this thread).

I remember but cannot find a study indicating that in otherwise crappy conditions (like bleeding from bad paper / ink) serif fonts are more legible, which is what I meant with the "relic"-comment. Arild and Cho have a study that has some similar conclusions. The fact that serif fonts have been so widespread in print media also contributes to people simply being "trained" at reading serifed fonts, making all of these studies even harder to do.

The bottom line is that there is clear evidence for people preferring to read sans serif fonts, with very little evidence of very small improvements in legibility by going to serif fonts.

Edit: To save you the trouble, and to amuse the forumites, here is the salient part regarding the randyness I alluded to:

Particularly interesting is the case of Sir Cyril Burt, well known in psychology circles for being accused of fabricating his results. It turns out that he is likely to have continued this deceptive behaviour in his typographical work ( Hartley & Rooum, 1983 ).

Unfortunately, many researchers, typographers and graphic designers continue to cite Burt and Weildon uncritically, meaning that many of the informal resources on typography found on the web today continues to propagate unsubstantiated claims on the utility of serifs.

[1] : Dyson, M., & Haselgrove, M. (2001). The influence of reading speed and line length on the effectiveness of reading from screen. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 54(4), 585-612.