Non Serif Fonts for E-Ink Readers

[Quoth]

I like Sans for comments, notes, inserts, titles, preambles.
I prefer a nice serif font for body text, it's rare to see sans used in paper novels.
I find solid blocks of italic or script fonts (no matter what the base font face is) tiring to read. I find it makes poetry more difficult.

[John F]

Originally Posted by GERGE

It is tweaked in Kobo. Tracking is decreased and weight is increased.

Most sans serif typefaces isn't good for body text in high definition screens like ereader screens. You should take a look at geometric egyptians.

This seems counterintuitive to me. The lack of serifs seems ideal for eink screens, especially at smaller text sizes.

Or are you stating a personal preference?

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by John F

This seems counterintuitive to me. The lack of serifs seems ideal for eink screens, especially at smaller text sizes.
Or are you stating a personal preference?

I agree. I use sans for smaller text precisely because it's more readable at smaller sizes.
Also the higher the resolution of screen, the MORE flexibility there is. Serif can be poor below 100 dpi.
It must be a personal preference.
Studies on Sans vs Serif are inconclusive, when the print medium/screen is good enough. People seem to find what they are used to easiest for reading for long periods.
Also all of it only applies to Western/Latin/Roman alphabetic text. It might apply to Cyrillic. Not sure about Hebrew, Arabic, Thai, Korean and Hindi. Clueless about Chinese, Japanese and all non-alphabetic script.

[Incanus]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Studies on Sans vs Serif are inconclusive, when the print medium/screen is good enough. People seem to find what they are used to easiest for reading for long periods.
Also all of it only applies to Western/Latin/Roman alphabetic text. It might apply to Cyrillic. Not sure about Hebrew, Arabic, Thai, Korean and Hindi. Clueless about Chinese, Japanese and all non-alphabetic script.

And poor little me thinking I was asking a simple question

Happy to unwittingly create food for thought,

[INCANUS]

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Studies on Sans vs Serif are inconclusive, when the print medium/screen is good enough. People seem to find what they are used to easiest for reading for long periods.

Inconclusive is being generous. Most of the studies I looked at a while back didn't seem to prove anything other than the participants came into the study with their preference and left with the same preference. OTOH, it seemed quite clear from several studies that compared various fonts that simple non-ornate fonts were found to be more readable whether serif or sans-serif.

[Quoth]

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Incanus

And poor little me thinking I was asking a simple question

You did ask a simple question and the answer is post #15 in this thread.

[Thasaidon]

My personal favourite is the Liberation set of fonts which I believe are free.

I find block of Liberation text very clear and clean.

I have tried many of the fonts mentioned above and I find many acceptable so you pays your money and takes your choice.

[Uncle Robin]

Originally Posted by DNSB

it seemed quite clear from several studies that compared various fonts that simple non-ornate fonts were found to be more readable whether serif or sans-serif.

This reminded me of a line from an episode of Fawlty Towers "Welcome to Mastermind. Your chosen specialty subject: The bleeding obvious"

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Uncle Robin

This reminded me of a line from an episode of Fawlty Towers "Welcome to Mastermind. Your chosen specialty subject: The bleeding obvious"

Ain't it the truth.

[GERGE]

Originally Posted by John F

This seems counterintuitive to me. The lack of serifs seems ideal for eink screens, especially at smaller text sizes.

Or are you stating a personal preference?

Well, typography is a strange field, it is immensely personal, yet has accepted practices and guidelines.

Historically, sans serif developed for display. That means pamphlets, signs, titles and such. With the invention of screens, they found a new place for themselves. As we all know, early screens were very low on pixel density; they didn't show serifs very well. They were quite terrible in fact. That was only reason they made their foray into body text, for screens that could not show serifs.

Now, with our high definition screens, there is not much need for them in body text. They have their place in menus and such. eInk screens nowadays are 300 ppi, that is quite high and enough to render serifs perfectly in body.

So, my statement is personal taste supported by page design guidelines. No objective facts, guidelines.

[Incanus]

Originally Posted by GERGE

Well, typography is a strange field, it is immensely personal, yet has accepted practices and guidelines.

Historically[...]

Excellent summary.

Originally Posted by GERGE

So, my statement is personal taste supported by page design guidelines. No objective facts, guidelines.

I agree.

[INCANUS]

[John F]

Originally Posted by GERGE

Well, typography is a strange field, it is immensely personal, yet has accepted practices and guidelines.

Historically, sans serif developed for display. That means pamphlets, signs, titles and such. With the invention of screens, they found their a new place for themselves. As we all know, early screens were very low on pixel density; they didn't show serifs very well. They were quite terrible in fact. That was only reason they made their foray into body text, for screens that could not show serifs.

Now, with our high definition screens, there is not much need for them in body text. They have this place in menus and similar places. eInk screens nowadays are 300 ppi, that is quite high and enough to render serifs perfectly in body.

So, my statement is personal taste supported by page design guidelines. No objective facts, guidelines.

Thank toy for the explanation.

So mine is preference (that I like Gill Sans for ebook bodies), that goes against guidelines.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by John F

So mine is preference (that I like Gill Sans for ebook bodies), that goes against guidelines.

Given the lack of convincing evidence either way? Your choice.

Of course, when the font police kick in your front door...

[Uncle Robin]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Of course, when the font police kick in your front door...

A day I deeply dread, because in all honesty I literally have no problem with Comic Sans, and have never understood why using it is considered to be as bad as a crime as infanticide.