Finding out what each typeface is best-suited to

File: serif-vs-sans-serif-font-infographic.jpg (564KB, 596x5107px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 596x5107px

>>308497
common sense, typography 101

>>308499
I mean, I know all of that, but I meant typefaces within the same category. Like, I know Times New Roman was designed specifically for newspapers, but what makes it better-suited to that usage over other serifs? Why would a different sans-serif work better for body copy over Helvetica? Is it just things like the x-height?

>>308499
Who the fuck prints at 1000dpi unless we're talking massive jobs. Every print shop I've worked with prints at 300dpi.

>>309618
>Who the fuck prints at 1000dpi unless we're talking massive jobs.

If it's line art on a press, sure. But generally - yeah, 2.5 * lpi is more a common value.

>>308506
Pirate the Lynda Intro Course on Typography my man.

Suitability is a massive question.

>>309626
Just downloaded it, thanks. But what do you mean by "Suitability is a massive question"? I get that it's all kind of subjective, but in the Times example I gave above, wouldn't they need to tailor certain elements to make the type work better for newspaper? Those are the kinds of things I'm asking about, since the letters don't have obvious things like ink traps.

>>309768
Yeah. That's shit like x-height, x-height to cap size ratio, ascender/descender lengths, counter size, aperture widths, stroke contrast, serif bracketing, serif widths, terminal angles, inter-alphabet differences, etc. lots and lots of things.

Even then, suitability isn't just about readability. Sometimes you make trade-offs for a more 'interesting' design, one that might be more congruent with your message, one that will connect with your demographic, etc.

>>309768
times was designed to account for the large dot gain (the spread of ink on paper) that occurs with shitty newspaper paper. So strokes and gap were designed specifically with that in mind to increase readability.

I think generally if you want to know about these types of things in terms of specific typeface design, you just need to research each typeface individually. There's too many variables for each font to categorize. Other than the more common classifications such as gothic or geometric or slab or the such

Most of what you'll learn will come from experience. There isn't any good single source for this unfortunately. As long as you keep an interest in learning, you'll come across things naturally. Keeping up with trends is also a great way. Proximal Nova was very trendy a few years ago, but now fonts like Circular are trendy. If you notice how a current style is reacting to a previous style, you'll develop a keener eye for not just the little details, but also the intended mood.

Aside from style, there's also practical things to learn. There are a bunch of books on typography you can learn this from. Historically, you'll see that the technological constraints had a lot to do with the use of typefaces. Technological considerations still matter today. A good primer is Apple's developer session video on introducing the San Francisco font.

>>310237
Thanks, anon. That was really helpful. Do you have any other recommendations in the vein of the SF demo?