[Scribus] which font to use

[avox]

Gregory Pittman wrote:
> 
> william f. maddock wrote:
>> Personally, I have found that long documents using nothing but
>> sans-serif tend to be rather painful on the eye. Unfortunately, you
>> seem to be stuck in a place where they'll pay a ton for software and
>> then refuse to do any kind of research on which of the tons of fonts
>> that came with the software actually look the best and are easiest on
>> the eye. If you can get away with changing the font without them
>> noticing there won't be any questions, but if they do notice, the one
>> making the change might have to hide under their desk ("but, we've
>> always done it this way").
> The reason serif fonts were developed was for legibility, especially
> with smaller size. Nonetheless, this can be a hard argument to get
> across on an intellectual level, so as a variant of what william is
> saying, sometimes making up two versions, one in sans, one in serif, so
> that people can see for themselves, can do more than any verbal argument
> you might make.
> 

Sans-serif is usually better suited for screen reading, since it has less
detail and screens have lower resolution.
OTOH readability very much depends on the font.
There are good sans-serif fonts which can be read painlessly in printed
form. Unfortunately Helvetica is not one of them. Have a look at Futura,
Frutiger, Gill Sans, Lucida Sans (comes with Java), FF Milo, Myriad, Optima
Nova, Syntax, or Corba (new Vista font).
Free sans serif fonts include Bitstream Vera (used for the new Scribus
logo), URWClassico, or Delicious (*very* unlike Helvetica!).

HeathenX, if you need to stick with a heavy sans-serif font like Helvetica,
consider increasing linespacing and tracking.
But hey, who reads manuals anyway? :-)

/Andreas

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/which-font-to-use-tf3512967.html#a9837753
Sent from the Scribus mailing list archive at Nabble.com.