Font Family should help Contrast

[jbruce]

Thanks Andy!

I'm noticing that the verdana size is really large. I'm wondering if this is a software thing. The test I did - Verdana was larger than the other, but only added 1 page of text. Leading and chapter breaks maybe?

For a Serif font I think ChaparralPro might work well. Consistent medium stroke width, and decent counter size. Unfortunately, again, mine is not TTF.

Also, if you wouldn't mind. The capital Q is usually the most distinctive glyph in a font. Could you run the Baskerville again? Cochin? only make sure there is a visible capital Q. If not I will try to find some TTF files I can work with. Basically I'm curious how well the device is rendering the fonts (or more the point - if it's really rendering that font).

Thanks again for helping with this little experiment.

RE: Serif/Sans

I think that even on screen serif/sans is a preference based on how accustomed we are to seeing the font in that context.

What if road signs were serif? License plates? Movie credits? Emergency/Educational vehicles?

Would they be easier or harder to read (because if serifed are more quickly recognizable - they should be easier)? But, would that because they are inherently easier/harder or would it be that we just aren't used to it in that context? Or, the figure/ground contrast just isn't there?

Cheers,
Josh

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by Andybaby

[snip]
If anyone would Like to Suggest a Font, Please Do. I would love to find the Perfect Font.
[snip]

I have four suggestions: ITC Bookman, Adobe Caslon, Adobe Garamond Pro, and Minion (also from Adobe, I think).

Bookman is not the most beautiful font, but it is very readable. Caslon is both nice-looking and readable. Garamond Pro is particularly elegant while still being quite readable for body text. It may need higher resolution than typical Readers provide, however. Minion is another font that combines great readability with decent looks.

Xenophon

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by Andybaby

If anyone would Like to Suggest a Font, Please Do. I would love to find the Perfect Font.

It is My Conclusion that a Font With a Heavy Line Weight (Bolder), but Large White Space in the lettering would be the most readable. Although, In my Previous Testing, Using a Bold Font VS. the Same Font non Bold, the Non Bold Version was Easier to ready. for that I Used Times, and Georgia to Test. Both Serif Fonts.

i'm not sure whether it's "perfect" or not but i've been using Fontin lately and i'm very pleased with it. it has a large x-height and dark stroke for improved readability at smaller sizes and for screen reading and i find it very attractive to look at and very readable. plus, it's free. and it's got a sans serif version as well.

Originally Posted by danegeld

After having my PRS-700 for less than a week, I've already converted a dozen books to a PDF format I designed in InDesign specifically for the reader. I've been a professional web and graphic designer for over 20 years and the reality is that sans-serif fonts are easier to read onscreen, while serif generally works better for print. However, in the last few years, I've started to believe that serif-on-paper has more to do with tradition and what we're accustomed to than any real advantage over sans-serif. Finding an optimal balance between type and white space seems to be the most important factor in readability. I've been using 14-point Myriad Pro for my PDFs, which is a little large, but I can read it easily for long periods without my glasses. It really comes down to what works for the individual.

i agree that white space is a key factor to readability, so leading, eye sizes and margins are also elements to take into account.

as for the serif / sans serif debate... i had a book once (paper book) with the body set in sans serif. i admit that my first reaction was suprise, because as you say we are used to seeing serif fonts in print. but although i quickly got over my surprise i noticed after reading it a while that it was not very comfortable to read ; i think serif fonts are really noticeably easier to recognise without extra effort, at least for me. i didn't manage to finish reading that book although the subject interested me and i think it was partly because i found it a bit uncomfortable to read.

but, as always, there is a lot of personal preference involved in anyone's choice...

very interesting thread. thanks for all the great links, everyone !

[Andybaby]

Im having Problems taking a decent photo. but here are my 16 source files for the following 20 fonts (the Adobe fonts Suggested didnt work) you may look at them your your 505 or 700 http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/316154/Font%20Test.rar Files are in LRF, book is the Gods of Mars, I added a Second paragraph with the ABC's

Adobe Caslon Pro: Not Embedable
Adobe Garamond Pro: Not Embedable
Adobe Heiti STD: Not Embedable
Arial: 342, Very Good Readability
Baskerville: 319, Very Poor Readability
Bell MT: 326, Poor Readability
Bodoni MT: 334, Average Readability
Bookman Old Style: 371, Very Good Readability
Calibri: 330, Good Readability
Comic Sans: 392, Very Good Readability
DejaVu Serif: 379, Very Good Readability
Franklin Gothic Book: 333, Good Readability
Georgia: 346, Good Readability
Gill Sans MT: 324, Very Good Readability
Helvetica World: 380, Very Good Readability
Lucida Bright: 371, Good Readability
Lucida Sans: 369, Good Readability
Minion Pro: Not Embedable
Times New Roman: 324, Good Readability
Verdana: 377, Very Good Readability

when I talk about Readability i am Talking Contrast, How well the Letters Jump out at you.
Sans fonts are Generally Better than Serif fonts but DejaVU Serif and Bookma OLD Style are Clearly Better than Times and my now old favorite, Georgia.

now taking the most readable fonts with the highest contrast. we have a few Choices

Sans Serif
Arial: 342, Very Good Readability
Gill Sans MT: 324, Very Good Readability
Helvetica World: 380, Very Good Readability
Verdana: 377, Very Good Readability

Serif
Bookman Old Style: 371, Very Good Readability
DejaVu Serif: 379, Very Good Readability

Comic Sans?!
Comic Sans: 392, Very Good Readability

You can use this site to Compare them http://www.typetester.org/ on what you like. for me i Prefer DejaVU Serif, I dobut anyone wants to read a book in comic sans, but my brother did. some people are like that. All the Sans Serif fonts are normal, save for Gill sans which is interestingly different.

The Sans Serif fonts, 3/5 of the winners are webfonts, while in the Serif Category, none of the webfonts had a high enough contrasts ratio.

[Andybaby]

Originally Posted by jbruce

Thanks Andy!

I'm noticing that the verdana size is really large. I'm wondering if this is a software thing. The test I did - Verdana was larger than the other, but only added 1 page of text. Leading and chapter breaks maybe?

for Your 4 pages of text. I used a Much Larger book. Verdana is much larger, but thats not a bad thing, its readable at smaller fonts

on my Reader, Geogia Sometimes Displayed as Times. sometimes I got Georgia i think while testing. its werid.

[el.astrologo]

I want to thank you guys for this post, I've been using your experiments to further enhance my reading experience and I totally love it! Thanks a lot!

I'm thinking that this kind of thing should be given format and made a sticky or something because it REALLY makes a lot of difference when you use the right font for this reader.

[jbruce]

Thanks Andy! Was finally able to take a look at them.

The fonts I thought offered nice readability (line-scanning, contrast, etc.): Verdan, Arial, Bookman Olde, DejaVu Serif, Franklin Gothic, Georgia, Gill Sans MT, Helvetica, and the Times New Roman.

Of those, I would have to say the best (IMO): Helvetica (increased line-height makes for easier scanning), Franklin Gothic (same reason), and Bookman Olde (slightly more kerning than Georgia and other serifed).

I want to thank you guys for this post, I've been using your experiments to further enhance my reading experience and I totally love it! Thanks a lot!

Glad it could help you. Hopefully others might find it useful. And, maybe the LRF format is open enough to allow it become part of the reader itself (part of the "formatting" spinner).

Cheers,
Josh

[Ea]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

i'm not sure whether it's "perfect" or not but i've been using Fontin lately and i'm very pleased with it. it has a large x-height and dark stroke for improved readability at smaller sizes and for screen reading and i find it very attractive to look at and very readable. plus, it's free. and it's got a sans serif version as well.
...

That is *very* nice Probably just what I was looking for. I'm going to try it out today.

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by Andybaby

SNIP
Adobe Caslon Pro: Not Embedable
Adobe Garamond Pro: Not Embedable
SNIP

That's odd. The font info for my copies of both of these fonts say that embedding is permitted. Just in case it matters, I bought the fonts directly from Adobe.

Xenophon

[jbruce]

Xenophon - are they TTF file formats? that's the crux. The 700, at least from my experiments will only read TTF file formats for fonts. I know with the Mac a lot of those fonts are OTF or DFONT.

Maybe Andy ran into a similar problem.

J

[Andybaby]

They Are TTFs, but Book Designer wouldnt let me Embed them.

I have them installed. probably came with CS4 that i have installed, but BD wouldnt let Me Embed them.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

i'm not sure whether it's "perfect" or not but i've been using Fontin lately and i'm very pleased with it. it has a large x-height and dark stroke for improved readability at smaller sizes and for screen reading and i find it very attractive to look at and very readable. plus, it's free. and it's got a sans serif version as well.

I do agree that Fontin is a rather nice font for an eink screen. And for those who like sans-serif type fonts better then serif, Fontin is kind of like a cross between serif and sans-serif. Plus when used with ePub on a 505/700, it's very readable at the default size.

[muse]

Wow, I just started on another book uses another font AND THE SCREEN WAS WAY CLEARER

The previous book used the font, which I assume is Times New Roman, looked horrible; it was totally foggyy!
And that was my first impression of my new PRS 700 - no good.

The difference is very much day and night for PRS 700.
Another thing I realised that it is the specification limitation of the e-ink screen, with ~170dpi.


I have a question here. Is it normal for the conversion process to take a while? Like 10mins?

[Andybaby]

10 minutes? no.

calibre tends to take longer than BD,
BD has never taken more than 20 seconds for me. and thats on a amd 3700.

also what font are you using now muse?

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by jbruce

Xenophon - are they TTF file formats? that's the crux. The 700, at least from my experiments will only read TTF file formats for fonts. I know with the Mac a lot of those fonts are OTF or DFONT.

Maybe Andy ran into a similar problem.

J

I've now had success with True-type flavored OTF fonts, and straight true-type fonts. I think I may also have had success with Postscript flavored OTF fonts (not sure at the moment, because the reader is downstairs & I'm upstairs and too lazy to go get it). I haven't tried straight Postscript fonts yet.

Xenophon