#300 DPI Optima?
4 messages in this thread
Tom, I am not a fan of Optima in general, but that has no bearing on my
next remark. Which is: I would not trust ANY 300 dpi version of Optima. And
it's exactly what you've read about those subtle flares that dooms it. All
my following remarks have mainly to do with the use of type for text,
although some of it carries over for display type as well.
If you want faces that work well at 300 dpi my first recommendation is
Adobe's Stone family. It was designed with dtp in mind. It has a large
x-height, which gives the counters lots of breathing space. The letterforms
are fairly simple, making them easily rendered by a laser printer, with a
minimum of jaggies. The sans face has some nice touches, and bears some
resemblance to Gill Sans. Whether the style of Stone Sans and Stone Serif
will age well remains to be seen, but that's another question entirely. And
although the packages cost more because of it, you get three weights
(regular, semibold and bold) in each package, which gives you more
flexibility.
Beyond that some pointers: look for serif faces with distinct, flat
serifs. In both sans and serif faces look for a large x-height and open
counters. Also look for faces that are slightly squarish looking, and in
which the vertical strokes are truly vertical in all the roman characters.
Strokes should have a substantial thickness.
Taking a quick look through the latest issue of Font & Function I can
give a random sampling of nixes, maybes and yeses.
New Baskerville: No – although it has a decent x-height, the serifs are
concave and too thin.
Weiss: No – the x-height is too small, the serifs too diminuitive, it's too
round and has many subtle curves and angles that would get lost.
Century Old Style: Maybe – the strokes are substantial, although there is
perhaps not enough weight difference between the thicks and thins and it
could therefore turn into mush. The serifs are flat and substantial and it
has a rigourously upright character. There's a vertical emphasis on this
face which means it will be a decent space saver if space is an issue.
[continued in reply]
[continued]
Goudy: No – the serifs are too delicate and it has many subtle curves and
angles which will be lost.
Serifa: Maybe – the strokes are even, the face is slightly square and the
serifs (since its a slab serif face) are strong and flat.
Lucida Sans and Serif: Yes/Maybe – this is another face designed for dtp
work, and it has all the qualities I've mentioned as desirable: large
x-height, open counters, squarish characters, strict vertical strokes,
substantial serifs. Unfortunately, I also think it is ugly as sin.
Utopia: Yes – this face was also designed by Adobe. It shares some of the
characteristics of Melior, but should hold up better to 300 dpi. Not the
world's most beautiful face, but not bad, either. And if you order before
the end of January from Adobe you get the Expert Collection free.
Univers: Yes – this is the face that should have gone into the LaserWriter
instead of Helvetica. It has fewer little curves (like those on the
lowercase "a" and uppercase "R" in Helvetica) to get scrunched at 300 dpi.
It's also squarer and more vertical than Helvetica.
I hope my explanations and examples provide you with some guidelines about
what to look for. Look up the examples I've given and check their qualities
and you'll have a good basis for comparison with other faces. One more
piece of advice: If you are using a true PostScript printer, look for
hinted fonts. Adobe's are and I'm told Bitstream's aren't. Although type
purists will complain that hints distort faces, with the distortions 300
dpi already puts on a face, the hints aren't going to make it worse and
they do improve legibility.
David,
Thanks for your exhaustive recommendations, which I'm going to think about.
The trouble with Stone is that I'm just not very wild about it, especially
Stone Informal, which seems pretty characterless (as it were) to me.
You've shot down a number of faces that attracted me (especially Goudy),
but of course it's dangerous shopping for 300 dpi fonts using a 1200/2400
dpi catalog.
I look forward to your thoughts on the Bitstream catalog.
TTT
Tom,
It's a funny old world! When we first bought the Goudy Old Style font, we
did so by accident. We meant to buy Garamond. For the longest while, we
seldom if ever used Goudy.
But then, I had an attack of gout! So I set my monthly newsletter in Goudy.
I liked it so much, I've decided to stick with it. Now this is a family
newsletter that I print entirely on my LaserWriter. So, maybe it is the
sort of sample you'd like to evaluate Goudy at 300dpi. If you're
interested, send me your address by e-mail and I'll be happy to send you a
copy of the latest issue.
Dave