[scribus] Need Arial, Times New Roman Font "equivalents" to look/print nice in PDF

[John Culleton]

On Monday 21 February 2011 14:25:37 John Brown wrote:
> On John Mon, 21 Feb 2011 13:17:59 -0500,
>
> John Culleton wrote:
> > On Monday 21 February 2011 12:52:35 Rob Oakes wrote:
> > > Hi Drw,
> > >
> > >
> > > I personally don't care for either Arial or Times New Roman. I
> > > think they are significantly overused.
>
> [snip]
>
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Rob Oakes
> >
> > I agree.
>
> [snip]
>
> > Second, because Times is the default for
> > MSWord it is easily recognizable as the product of an amateur
> > typographer. So I suggest something outside the Microsoft Windows
> > collection, such as Bitstream Charter, Minion, Adobe Garamond or
> > Sabon.
> > --
> > John Culleton
>
> That is a reason not to use a font? Because the commoners use it?
>
> I would think that the work of an amateur typographer will look
> amateurish whichever font he uses. Similarly, I would expect the
> work of the professional to look professional regardless.
>
>
> Regards,
> Alias John Brown.


Well its a tough world out there. When you submit to a prepub reviewer 
you don't want to give them an extra reason for denying a review. Now 
I have had one publisher of academic works insist on Times Roman but 
they also insisted on a large point size so that it didn't come out 
too badly.  But that publisher obviously didn't know its corporate ear 
from its elbow when it came to setting up books in the current era. 
They wanted camera ready copy but with no trim guides. 

Looking at my Galaxy Gauge Font I.D. guide the only Transitional Serif 
font that seems more compressed horizontally than Times Roman is 
Perpetua, and that is an italic. 

In Bringhurst I find the passage: 
"When the only font available is Cheltenham or Times Roman the 
typographer must make the most of its virtues...but there is nothing 
to be gained by pretending that Times Roman is Bembo..."

And Felici says simply:

"Times is probably used inappropriately more than any other typeface 
today."  

Felici also shows a passage set in TR followed by the same passage set 
in Sabon showing the advantage of the wider face. It looks much less 
crowded. 

One more time. There are lots of better choices. It is not a matter of 
being commoners, it is a matter of looking like amateurs. The 
authorities, at least the ones on my shelf, seem to agree. 

One nice font that I forgot to mention is Stone.


-- 
John Culleton
Able Indexers and Typesetters
http://wexfordpress.com