Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question about fonts

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Question about fonts

    My fonts are set to "Lucida Grande Regular 11" and I think this must be default because I don't remember ever changing. I would like to be able to italicize things in Miscellaneous Notes as well as in Sources but get a message that Lucida Grande doesn't support italics. Am willing to change to another font but would like to have benefit of other's opinions and as to what makes a good font for Reunion that supports all features.
    Advice appreciated, Junior

    #2
    Re: Question about fonts

    Originally posted by Junior Waldo View Post
    what makes a good font for Reunion that supports all features.
    I think font preference is a very individual thing. Pick any font family that you like, one that supports italics and any foreign characters that are important to you. (For example, if you have a lot of Polish families, you need an ł, etc.) Most modern fonts have everything you need, so any font you like reading and working with should do.

    I like my "Bouwsma Text" and "Arno Pro", but your mileage may differ I'm a serif kinda guy. Georgia (serif) and Verdana (sans serif) also are both designed for readability on a computer monitor and may be worth a look.
    Dennis J. Cunniff
    Click here to email me

    Comment


      #3
      Re: Question about fonts

      Originally posted by Dennis J. Cunniff View Post
      I think font preference is a very individual thing. Pick any font family that you like, one that supports italics and any foreign characters that are important to you. (For example, if you have a lot of Polish families, you need an ł, etc.) Most modern fonts have everything you need, so any font you like reading and working with should do.

      I like my "Bouwsma Text" and "Arno Pro", but your mileage may differ I'm a serif kinda guy. Georgia (serif) and Verdana (sans serif) also are both designed for readability on a computer monitor and may be worth a look.
      Thanks Dennis,
      I think I'll try Verdana because it does seem to be very easy to read on screen and also compatible with Word.

      Comment


        #4
        Re: Question about fonts

        Yes, Verdana works well. For 'fields under buttons' in Family View, take a look also at Trebuchet MS, which fits a bit more into the space, while still being very legible. It's a matter of taste.
        Last edited by Michael Talibard; 09 September 2016, 03:48 PM.

        Comment


          #5
          Re: Question about fonts

          While it is true that the choice of font [or fount as it used to be pre-Microsoft discovering them!] is personal there are some immutables.

          Despite having used Macs since almost day one I have to admit that with Georgia MS did a wonderful job for screen use. It is good in all sizes and as it uses 'old style' numerals typos like O for 0 and 1 for I or l are as clear as they are here [which is not often the case in 'sans' fonts].

          For continuous reading I'd always go for a seriffed face, and legibility tests tend to lean in this direction. Personally I only use sans [in my case Gill] for headings to give a page a bit of colour. Gill and Garamond are wonderful together, but Garamond does need a reasonable printer. For printing under any conditions nothing is as good as Palatino, largely because it was designed for newspapers. It is also a very lovely face on a character by character basis and one of very few faces that is good in any size or in italic or in bold.

          Perhaps the most important factor when it comes to legibility is line length [60chrs is often quoted, but what we have here is pretty good on screen] and letter spacing. On the whole seriffed faces fare better with too close letter spacing than sans.

          Cheers, Colin

          Comment


            #6
            Re: Question about fonts

            Originally posted by colinc View Post
            While it is true that the choice of font [or fount as it used to be pre-Microsoft discovering them!] is personal there are some immutables.

            Despite having used Macs since almost day one I have to admit that with Georgia MS did a wonderful job for screen use. It is good in all sizes and as it uses 'old style' numerals typos like O for 0 and 1 for I or l are as clear as they are here [which is not often the case in 'sans' fonts].

            For continuous reading I'd always go for a seriffed face, and legibility tests tend to lean in this direction. Personally I only use sans [in my case Gill] for headings to give a page a bit of colour. Gill and Garamond are wonderful together, but Garamond does need a reasonable printer. For printing under any conditions nothing is as good as Palatino, largely because it was designed for newspapers. It is also a very lovely face on a character by character basis and one of very few faces that is good in any size or in italic or in bold.

            Perhaps the most important factor when it comes to legibility is line length [60chrs is often quoted, but what we have here is pretty good on screen] and letter spacing. On the whole seriffed faces fare better with too close letter spacing than sans.

            Cheers, Colin
            Thanks Colin for the additional things to consider. Your thoughts will help me to do some more experimenting.
            Junior

            Comment

            Working...
            X