What's your favorite font to read in?

[GtrsRGr8]

Originally Posted by meeera

There's a decent discussion of the serif wars here:

http://alexpoole.info/blog/which-are...rif-typefaces/

Conclusion:

Thanks and karma.

If the conclusion is a representative sample of the rest of the work, I thought that it was more than decent, it was very good.

Maybe the failure to prove, in scientific studies, the superiority of serif fonts is the reason that publishers increased their usage of sans serif in the past 15 years or so (if myperception about that is true).

The upshot, then, is use whatever style of font that you want to. But old habits die hard, and I'm going to be tense and anxious when I start using sans serif in the text on some projects.

[howyoudoin]

In my experience of purchasing ebooks and seeing how utterly generic and bland the fonts are in most cases, in comparison to the meticulous care taken for the physical edition of the same books, I have come to believe that there is no consistent science driving the choice of fonts in ebooks. Electronic editions are given the step-child treatment.

I reckon publishers just use whatever font is cheapest for them to license for electronic editions (the reader can change up the fonts on his reading application anyway, right?), or do the bare minimum with no thought towards 'horses for courses'.. In some cases there is a gross misapplication of reading 'science'.

For instance, some ebooks have sans serif fonts when their physical equivalents have serif fonts, which seems to imply an application of the "serif for paper and sans serif for screens" rule (which may or may not be correct by itself). Putting the matter of the validity of the rule aside, this anyway ignores the wisdom that e-readers should be treated like paper, not screens. But then if the statistics show that more ebooks are read on the computer and phone screens than on ereaders, then this perversion of the horses for courses rule does make sense to some extent.

[kacir]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

... which seems to imply an application of the "serif for paper and sans serif for screens" rule (which may or may not be correct by itself).

The question is, for a given e-book sold by Amazon or other vendor, how many times it will be read on a latest generation 300dpi e-ink, how many times it will be read on a cheapest e-ink reader, how many times it will be read on a 'retina' quality LCD or OLED display and finally, how many of those will be read on a cheap phone or an obsolete tablet with 640x480 screen?

Even 300dpi e-ink might be not enough to render fine sherifs in good enough details. This is why Amazon started to use Caecilia - a slab serif font. So that you can have your cake and eat it too.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by kacir

The question is, for a given e-book sold by Amazon or other vendor, how many times it will be read on a latest generation 300dpi e-ink, how many times it will be read on a cheapest e-ink reader, how many times it will be read on a 'retina' quality LCD or OLED display and finally, how many of those will be read on a cheap phone or an obsolete tablet with 640x480 screen?

Even 300dpi e-ink might be not enough to render fine sherifs in good enough details. This is why Amazon started to use Caecilia - a slab serif font. So that you can have your cake and eat it too.

Caecelia made good sense when ereaders did not have good resolutions. With higher resolutions, they do offer two good serif fonts - Palatino and Baskerville. More choice is always good. One can always fall back to the slab serif if the serifs on the book are not displayed satisfactorily. One cannot however use the same serifs as the physical book if the publisher does not embed them in the ebook at all.

Publishers have the option of individually tailoring their product even more. It's a shame that they generally do not do so.

[Blossom]

I'll stick with slab serif fonts. They are easier for me to read with than just serif or sans serif.

My favorite is Amasis with a little weight added.

Sent from my XT1528

[Barty]

Originally Posted by Blossom

I'll stick with slab serif fonts. They are easier for me to read with than just serif or sans serif.

My favorite is Amasis with a little weight added.

Sent from my XT1528

I like slab serif too. It adds a little more contrast, which is why it's often used by newspapers to compensate for the poorer print quality.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

In my experience of purchasing ebooks and seeing how utterly generic and bland the fonts are in most cases, in comparison to the meticulous care taken for the physical edition of the same books, I have come to believe that there is no consistent science driving the choice of fonts in ebooks. Electronic editions are given the step-child treatment.

I reckon publishers just use whatever font is cheapest for them to license for electronic editions (the reader can change up the fonts on his reading application anyway, right?), or do the bare minimum with no thought towards 'horses for courses'.. In some cases there is a gross misapplication of reading 'science'.

The cheapest, is the devices built in Generic font Family sets (serif, sans-serif, mono-spaced). Those were paid for and supplied by someone else . OPM rules
Some publishers comment out the desired font in the CSS, leaving the generic fall-back. If you happen to have a big selection of PERSONAL USE fonts available (like the 1K+ fonts that came with Wordperfect Office 8 Pro), it only takes a few minutes to select and embed a Substitute (if not the original choice)

Remember: This is for personal use only, the font source license terms still apply

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by theducks

The cheapest, is the devices built in Generic font Family sets (serif, sans-serif, mono-spaced). Those were paid for and supplied by someone else . OPM rules
Some publishers comment out the desired font in the CSS, leaving the generic fall-back. If you happen to have a big selection of PERSONAL USE fonts available (like the 1K+ fonts that came with Wordperfect Office 8 Pro), it only takes a few minutes to select and embed a Substitute (if not the original choice)

Remember: This is for personal use only, the font source license terms still apply

Yes, I am aware of the fonts on the reader and the fallback to those fonts when none is specified by the publisher.

My discussion was about fonts embedded in ebooks. Please do not digress and roll your eyes at me

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

In my experience of purchasing ebooks and seeing how utterly generic and bland the fonts are in most cases, in comparison to the meticulous care taken for the physical edition of the same books, I have come to believe that there is no consistent science driving the choice of fonts in ebooks. Electronic editions are given the step-child treatment.

I reckon publishers just use whatever font is cheapest for them to license for electronic editions (the reader can change up the fonts on his reading application anyway, right?), or do the bare minimum with no thought towards 'horses for courses'.. In some cases there is a gross misapplication of reading 'science'.

It depends on the Reader or program/app and the available fonts. The thing is with say a Kobo, I can sideload the font(s) I want to have available. So the choice is mine from whatever fonts I have available. With a Kindle (non-jailbroken), the only way to install the font(s) of your choice is to embed. Some apps use the installed fonts on the device and some also allow you to sideload. You can also embed as well if need be.

So no, eBooks are not the step-child. I've seen some eBooks with the same fonts embedded that were used in the pBook and without any modification, the main reading font is too light on an eInk screen. One common embedded font that doesn't work as is is Adobe Garamond Pro because it is too light. I can sort out that problem fairly easily, but most people cannot.

For instance, some ebooks have sans serif fonts when their physical equivalents have serif fonts, which seems to imply an application of the "serif for paper and sans serif for screens" rule (which may or may not be correct by itself). Putting the matter of the validity of the rule aside, this anyway ignores the wisdom that e-readers should be treated like paper, not screens. But then if the statistics show that more ebooks are read on the computer and phone screens than on ereaders, then this perversion of the horses for courses rule does make sense to some extent.

I find sans-serif as the base font to make the eBook have a cheap feel. Like the publisher and/or author didn't give a damn about the book.

One of the worst eBooks I have seen is The Martian. It has FreeSerif, FreSansOblique, FreeSans, FreeMonoOblique, & FreeMono embedded. These fonts are all much too light for an eInk screen. The worst of the bunch is FreeMono. The book makes some extensive use of monospace and the font embedded is very very light. This is a case of the publisher not seeing how these fonts look on an eInk screen. They look awful and I had to dump them because they make the eBook rather hard to read.

I've made a version of Charis SIL that I call ChareInk that I think looks very good on eInk sceens. It is available for free on MR. https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=184056

[GlenBarrington]

The older I get the bigger it needs to be.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

It depends on the Reader or program/app and the available fonts. The thing is with say a Kobo, I can sideload the font(s) I want to have available. So the choice is mine from whatever fonts I have available. With a Kindle (non-jailbroken), the only way to install the font(s) of your choice is to embed. Some apps use the installed fonts on the device and some also allow you to sideload. You can also embed as well if need be.

So no, eBooks are not the step-child. I've seen some eBooks with the same fonts embedded that were used in the pBook and without any modification, the main reading font is too light on an eInk screen. One common embedded font that doesn't work as is is Adobe Garamond Pro because it is too light. I can sort out that problem fairly easily, but most people cannot.

True, but that's a benefit of the format itself rather than a provision by the publisher, isn't it? Publishers could embed a nice commercial font to give the ebook a unique feel like they do for physical books. Some do, but many don't. Plenty of lay-readers don't go to the lengths of putting different fonts onto their devices like we do, and they're probably the majority of e-readers. So while the format has the potential to be prettier than the physical book, publishers ,IMO, give it the step-treatment by not customising it right off the bat, the onus of beautifying the ebook falling onto the reader instead.

I find sans-serif as the base font to make the eBook have a cheap feel. Like the publisher and/or author didn't give a damn about the book.

One of the worst eBooks I have seen is The Martian. It has FreeSerif, FreSansOblique, FreeSans, FreeMonoOblique, & FreeMono embedded. These fonts are all much too light for an eInk screen. The worst of the bunch is FreeMono. The book makes some extensive use of monospace and the font embedded is very very light. This is a case of the publisher not seeing how these fonts look on an eInk screen. They look awful and I had to dump them because they make the eBook rather hard to read.

I've made a version of Charis SIL that I call ChareInk that I think looks very good on eInk sceens. It is available for free on MR. https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=184056

Yeah, I hate sans fonts in text too. I'm okay with spare use of those for headlines and such. Other than text-books, I have only ever come across sans serif text fonts in cheap paperbacks printed on thin greyish paper. So the sight of a sans serif font in an ebook automatically makes it seem like a cheap ebook for me.

I tend to get sick of fonts quickly, so I have 15 select ones that I rotate through on my H2O. Your modified Charis is already one of them. Thanks, JSWolf.

[PurpleStar]

Lately I'm reading real well with Kobo UD Kakugo. Kind of a funny looking font but it works for me.

[ZodWallop]

Lately I've been sticking with Google's Noto font, which seems to just be a rebranding of their Literata font. I'm specifically using the version adjusted by Gerge here: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...57&postcount=7

[nabsltd]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Adobe Garamond Pro looks fine printed. It doesn;t look good on an eInk screen. It just looks too light.

I've found the solution: Garamond Premier Pro Caption. It's just enough darker than Garamond Premier Pro (which is a little darker than Adobe Garamond Pro) to be perfect for me on the Onyx Boox M92. If you need darker still, try Garamond Premier Pro Caption Medium.

Because it is an optical size for captions, this means it has a bit more white space between lines than the regular version. For many, it will be fine, but to me, it looked a bit too open, so I changed the default line spacing from 100% to 95% on the Boox, and that closed it up nicely.

Without that, though, the overall metrics (width plus line height) worked out that a book with 722 pages in Minion Pro became 720 pages in Garamond Premier Pro Caption, which is a good indicator of how "dense" the font is at a particular point size.

[mathil]

My favourite is Livory, with just a little bit of weight added to it thanks to the Metazoa Kobo patches. It looks elegant (I especially like the italic) and looks good even at small sizes. Here are some screenshots.