As someone just getting into type design I was wondering what the main considerations are currently for optimising typefaces for web and digital applications in general, especially now as the gap between digital and print is smaller than ever. Is designing to a pixel grid required? How important is hinting nowadays for usability? Do you think we will ever get to a point where there is zero distinction between typefaces intended for print and digital?
0
Comments
Compare Helvetica Neue on the left with Calibri on the right. Calibri's apertures are much more open, aiding legibility at small sizes.
However, I have a couple of samples from the first print run available still. PM me your post address and I'll send a copy on its way to you, or anybody else interested.
@Johannes Neumeier This is awesome work, thanks for sharing! Silta looks great.
I’m slightly going off topic here, but considering the relation of type designed for print as opposed to digital, how do print based decisions like ink traps affect usability in digital?
I actually quite like the look of ink traps and deep notches on screen if nothing for aesthetic value, I feel the it activates the whites more adds a certain vibrancy.
No, designing to a pixel grid is no longer required, because most of screen reading is on phones which have very high resolutions that are better than print.
Since there are still a good chunk of users with Windows, its still important to apply auto hinting for their reading comfort, but most users don't benefit much from hints. Of course if you are trying to retail a font family for top dollar then you will go the extra mile and do hand hinting, but the value of this for users is going to continue to decline.
I think we are already at the point where there is zero distinction between typefaces intended for print and digital; that future is here, it just isn't evenly distributed. Amstelvar is currently my best example of this.