It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
And what was the inaugural moment for screen serifs? Georgia? I mean, it was almost 30 years ago (1993), so is there probably some earlier successful attempts?
⟨…⟩ you mention research about this topic; is it something I can still find?
Chris Lozos said:
The idea became popular prior to the digital era, in the 1930s Miles Tinker's readability testing published in his book "Readability of Print." He concluded that serif type was best for continuous reading. This battle continued for decades with other conclusions like "We read best what we read most". Screen resolution had a different set of operating factors than print, as Thomas points out. My guess would be that the push back will continue between various forces with each side having a voice.
Nick Shinn said:
Certainly, fonts do have rendering problems at low resolution, but how much distortion is acceptable is open to debate. Microsoft and Apple took different approaches, crisp vs. fuzzy. In as much as Microsoft foregrounded its sub-pixel-implementing fonts (including serifed) in readability theory, e.g. “Now Read This”, it did play to and reinforce the idea that there is something demonstrable about readability, and that sharpness is desirable; however, I concur with Thomas that it was just very very obvious that serifed type didn’t work as well as sans on pre-Retina screens.Times was actually not too bad, and with its finely tapered serifs has some finesse when scaled up in size.
Mark Simonson said:
The original Mac system included a serifed font, New York. It was the default in many of the included apps, such as Note Pad, MacWrite, even the Calculator. It was kind of a low-res bitmapped interpretation of ITC Garamond, Apple's corporate typeface at the time. The default was changed to Geneva (a sans serif) in one of the early system updates. I don't know what the reason for the change was, but I don't think anyone complained. I remember thinking it was kind of cool and didn't find it hard to read.All of this was before the use of outline fonts on-screen.It might be interesting to note that the default font in web browsers was (maybe still is) Times. The early web was Times all the time.
Maxim Zhukov said:
⟨…⟩ you mention research about this topic; is it something I can still find?Chuck Bigelow did quite a bit of research of that subject in early and mid-1980s. Some of his findings and hypotheses were published in The Seybold Report, Scientific American, TUGboat, the RIDT conference proceedings, etc. See, for example:http://bit.ly/2s4ON4yhttp://bit.ly/2s5hy0Phttp://bit.ly/2qqlBb9http://stanford.io/2qt9S7m
Hello, everyone!While I was writing some stuff, I began wondering when and how this idea that sans-serif type is more legible on screen started.Do any of you have an idea about it? Cheers!
Mark Simonson said:
The one I had was earlier than that. That one is from 1985. The one I had was a much less polished draft version from mid 1984.