[Scribus] which font to use

[heathenx]

 >But hey, who reads manuals anyway?

very true...reading any manual should be a last resort...ha ha.

heathenx

avox wrote the following on 4/4/2007 10:18 AM:
> 
> 
> 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
>