#Bitstream at 300 dpi
4 messages in this thread
As luck would have it, my free fonts and type catalogue from Bitstream
arrived today, the day after my lengthy message to you. So, as per my
promise in MacDesign Forum, here are some choices I think you should
consider for 300 dpi output. I remember your asking about a "serif font
with enough charm and interest to be interesting and fun to use, but not so
mannered that it's unusable" and also your liking for Optima. Although I
don't know for what kind of documents you're planning to use these for,
I'll try to direct you to good-old-all-around-use type faces. But bear in
mind that I have never used Bitstream fonts, as so am only giving these a
recommendation based on my ideas of what should look good at 300 dpi, not
what these might actually turn out to look like. Plus, don't forget that
one person's charming may be another person's cloying.
Serif:
Bitstream Carmina: The angles on the vertical strokes on the uppercase "M"
alarm me a bit, but otherwise this looks (from the sample) like a decent
face, with some interesting touches. Not exactly to my taste, but not
without some appeal. The characters are very open and somewhat squarish,
which is good. If you're buying Type F fonts, you may have to end up buying
all eight styles, which may be overkill for you, though. (I'm don't know
how Bitstream's prepackaging of Type F fonts works.) If you can pick and
choose, go for the medium/medium italic and bold/bold italic.
ITC Garamond: Yes, I know you've heard us dumping on this face, and it is a
bland version, but for your uses, it's the best of the Garamonds, I think.
Skip the light version if you can, and go for the book/book italic and
bold/bold italic. If you want a bit more flavour go for…
Classical Garamond (Sabon): The characters are a little bit tighter, with a
smaller x-height, but the regular version also seems a touch heavier than
the ITC Garamond Light, so I expect it would hold up better.
ITC Zapf Book: This one fills all my criteria for what would make a decent
300 dpi face. The italics are a bit boring, but nicer than the italics in
Zapf
[continued in reply]
[continued]
Elliptical 711 (Melior). However, if space is more of a consideration than
style, you may want to go with the Melior instead, although its regular
weight seems a little bit weak.
Sans Serif:
Humanist 777 (Frutiger): A little less elegant than Gill, but a little more
elegant than Univers. Its not a stylish as Optima, but I doubt it'll turn
into mush after you run it through your printer. This one should work okay
at 300 dpi.
New Gothic: I don't know how you could go wrong with this one. Big
x-height; clean, simple lines. I happen to find it indescribably boring,
but others swear by it.
Swiss 742/Zurich (Univers): I recommended this to you before, and I do so
again.
I hope these suggestions are of some help. I think, in your situation, you
should not worry too much about elegant typography, while it's nice to
strive for, your budget and your means are working against you. Look
instead to creating clean, legible, coherent documents with the faces that
will work best for you. That's all part of the challenge and interest of
good typography and design, too.
If you want to ask me my opinions about any specific fonts you have in
mind, please go ahead. By the way, I don't like Stone Informal, either. But
since Adobe markets the sans, serif and informal packages separately,
there's no compulsion to acquire it.
What do you think of the sample they sent, the Schneidler font?
David,
Thanks again for all the work you've put into your recommendations. More
food for thought . . .
Cheers,
TTT