←back to thread

386 points italophil | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.199s | source
Show context
LucasFonts ◴[] No.46229533[source]
Our studio, LucasFonts, designed Calibri. Here are our CEO Luc(as) de Groot’s thoughts on the matter:

The decision to abandon Calibri on the grounds of it being a so-called “wasteful diversity font” is both amusing and regrettable. Calibri was specifically designed to enhance readability on modern computer screens and was selected by Microsoft in 2007 to replace Times New Roman as the default font in the Office suite. There were sound reasons for moving away from Times: Calibri performs exceptionally well at small sizes and on standard office monitors, whereas serif fonts like Times New Roman tend to appear more distorted. While serif fonts are well-suited to high-resolution displays, such as those found on modern smartphones, on typical office screens the serifs introduce unnecessary visual noise and can be particularly problematic for users with impaired vision, such as older adults.

Professional typography can be achieved with both serif and sans-serif fonts. However, Times New Roman—a typeface older than the current president—presents unique challenges. Originally crafted in Great Britain for newspaper printing, Times was optimised for paper, with each letterform meticulously cut and tested for specific sizes. In the digital era, larger size drawings were repurposed as models, resulting in a typeface that appears too thin and sharp when printed at high quality.

Serif fonts are often perceived as more traditional, but they are also more demanding to use effectively. While a skilled typographer can, in theory, produce excellent results with Times, using it in its default digital form is not considered professional practice.

Calibri, by contrast, incorporates extensive spacing adjustments and language-specific refinements. The digital version of Times New Roman, developed in the early days of computing, offers only minimal kerning and letter-pair adjustments. This is especially evident in words set in all capitals—such as “CHICAGO”—where the spacing is inconsistent: the letters “HIC” are tightly packed, while “CAG” are spaced too far apart. Microsoft cannot rectify these issues without altering the appearance of existing documents.

replies(10): >>46229784 #>>46230177 #>>46230521 #>>46230526 #>>46230811 #>>46231066 #>>46231353 #>>46233540 #>>46234054 #>>46234367 #
nabla9 ◴[] No.46230177[source]
I think we all can agree that Comic Sans MS reflects the current US government best, both spiritually and aesthetically.
replies(7): >>46230388 #>>46230401 #>>46231862 #>>46231997 #>>46232817 #>>46234151 #>>46238364 #
1. adolph ◴[] No.46231997[source]
Your comment may be in jest but there is some evidence that "easier to read" does not benefit "retain what was read."

  And that brings us back to these ugly fonts. Because their shapes are 
  unfamiliar, because they are less legible, they make the mind work a little 
  harder; the slight frisson of Comic Sans wakes us up or at least prevents us 
  from leaning on the usual efficiencies. “The complex fonts . . . function 
  like an alarm,” Alter writes. They signal “that we need to recruit additional 
  mental resources to overcome that sense of difficulty.”
  
https://lithub.com/the-ugliness-of-comic-sans-has-a-practica...