Screen Fonts: Shape Accuracy or On-Screen Readability?
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 23rd Jun 2009 21:40 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces The Engineering 7 weblog has an item about the improvements made in the ClearType font rendering technology which has been included in Windows since Windows XP. While I won't go too deeply into that post, I did figure it was a good opportunity to talk about font antialiasing in general; which type do you prefer?
E-mail Print r 0   · Read More · 96 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/gr5
Thread beginning with comment 370317
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Wrong assumption
by jal_ on Thu 25th Jun 2009 21:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Wrong assumption"
jal_
Member since:
2006-11-02

Typographers make fonts for human beings (sounds very ubuntu doesn't it ;-), to be read by normal human beings, and they try to achieve best readability for about any kind of communication in our everyday lives. They are knowledgeable about human perception and create fonts and layouts to match and support that perception in the most natural and unintrusive way (well to catch attention they sometimes deliberatly break some rules, but that has a clear purpose and scope then).


Agreed. But that doesn't mean one should always go for best screen approximation of a printed font, especially not in a browser, or IDE, since that almost never gets printed. Microsoft understands that, even designing fonts specifically for on-screen reading.

Reply Parent Score: 1