Settings

Theme

Letter and symbol misrecognition in highly legible typefaces (2015)

typography.guru

33 points by isralcduke · 7 comments

Reader

3 threads
hackuser

If you are a professional in the field of typography, what is the/an authoritative source on (mis)recognition of characters - if that is even the correct term and if I am asking the right question? (Maybe typeface only has a tiny effect, for example.)

It interests me and I pick it up in bits and pieces as I come across it, but that's slow, leaves holes in my understanding, and it's unreliable: I'm never sure of the quality of what I'm reading - is it just some person's opinion? A fringe theory? etc.

notacoward

I prefer the "infant" lowercase 'a' purely on the basis of aesthetics. The two-story 'a' seems fussy and pedantic. And the loopy 'g' descender that's so fashionable nowadays drives me nuts. In both cases I suppose an argument can be made that the versions I dislike are better for readability, and thus should be preferable as defaults, but I'm glad we almost always get to choose our own typefaces most of the time nowadays.

  • MaulingMonkey

    > In both cases I suppose an argument can be made that the versions I dislike are better for readability

    This actually matters for my custom tiny ~5x4 pixel font on 4K screens, but I'm still using the infant lowercase 'a'. Partly because I can't seem to recreate the double-stacked a that I liked, and partly because it's very hard to fit into the 5x4 grid. But the end result is that there's less than a pixel difference between my 'a' and my 'o': A solid pixel instead of an AAed one.

    (A 2x screenshot: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/MaulingMonkey/TtyRecMonkey... )

mbrookes

Ironic then that this article is set in a hard-to-read typeface!

Keyboard Shortcuts

j
Next item
k
Previous item
o / Enter
Open selected item
?
Show this help
Esc
Close modal / clear selection