Making images full screen

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I must be missing some sort of font gene that everyone else has. Because unless it's Wingdings, or something similarly stupid, I just don't notice them all that much--print OR digital. I see big/small, bold, italic and regular (and monspace) typeface, but that's about it. When people start talking ascenders/descenders, kerning pairs, serif, etc... my eyes just glaze over. Props to those who jump in and wallow around with them and wrassle 'em into something pretty that my eyes can slide right past, but I just don't get it. It's always been the words I'm in it for, not the ink.

But, sweetie:

That's exactly the point. Your eyes are supposed to glide right over them, and never give it a moment's thought. Just like in print. If we screw up our job, and embed some hinky font that's hard on the eyes, while you wouldn't think about it--your eyes and brain would. You might feel that your eyes are tired, or even that you're bored--but it can be as simple as the layout person used the wrong font, and thus, there are fewer (or more) letters per line of text than there ought to be.

When you read lines of text (speaking of stuff that will make your eyes and brain glaze over...), each time your eyeballs flick back to the beginning of the next line, your brain gets a wee dose of some endorphin or chemical, or something. I forget exactly what it is. Anyway, it gets this wee jolt. If your make the text lines too long--say, 75-80 characters--you start to actually feel bored. Or, rather, your brain feels a way that you interpret as bored, or restless. If the line's too short, you start to feel antsy, or your eyes feel tired, because you've been jolting your poor wee brain a bit too often. Either of these scenarios, = bad. Why? Because naturally, you'll think that it's the fault of the book. You'll never think it's the fault of the print, right?

Part of the job of the layout person and the font selection has to do with getting that right.

The other part is ensuring that the font selection doesn't abrade the eyes, or alienate the reader. After all, Doug, would you want to read a novel in Comic Sans? Papyrus? I suspect you'd notice that, right?

So, while you think that you don't notice--the fact that you don't is proof that the wee, unheralded elves at the other end are doing their jobs.

:-)

Hitch

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Hitch

The other part is ensuring that the font selection doesn't abrade the eyes, or alienate the reader. After all, Doug, would you want to read a novel in Comic Sans? Papyrus? I suspect you'd notice that, right?

I'm assuming by your context that I'd probably notice, but ... case in point: besides hearing people complain about (or make fun of) Comic Sans, I have no idea what either of those fonts you mentioned looks like. I know a few names like "Times New Roman" or "Arial", but I'd be hard pressed to be able to pick them out of a lineup. That's what I mean by missing a gene.

Somehow, many readers became whiz-bang fontonologists after they embraced digital text. I never new I was supposed to care.

So like I said; unless they're utterly ridiculous--as I assume the fonts you mentioned must be, then I'm capable of adapting to pretty-much any reasonably legible font. The "wrong" body-font is typically just not a deal-breaker for me. *shrug*

[Turtle91]

And just to play devils advocate at this party

Once someone found the "right font" (for them) wouldn't they tell the device/app to display all of their books with that font?? And with reflowable books, the number of characters per line changes with the user's preferences...

Unless a font plays a specific purpose in telling or enhancing the story, then I leave it generic and let the user figure it out.

...granted... I clean books for a MUCH smaller audience, so take it FWIW....

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Turtle91

And just to play devils advocate at this party

Once someone found the "right font" (for them) wouldn't they tell the device/app to display all of their books with that font?? And with reflowable books, the number of characters per line changes with the user's preferences...

Unless a font plays a specific purpose in telling or enhancing the story, then I leave it generic and let the user figure it out.

...granted... I clean books for a MUCH smaller audience, so take it FWIW....

Yes, yes, Turtle, that's true--the reader changes the font to suit him or her, by which I mean, the size. And that changes the characters per line. BUT...you ever notice that the default size, on pretty much every dedicated reader, is 66 char line?

Twooly two?

@Diap:

THIS is comic sans:



And THIS is Papyrus:

I know they're large, but...whatcha gonna do?

God knows, yes, I've seen a lot worse, but...

My point is simply that the very art of print layout or font selection is so that your reader doesn't notice. That's all.

(And yes, there is some mathematical stuff that you gotta do, too, surrounding--yes, I kid thee not--the Spira mirabilis, but the ideal print layout is unnoticeable. And that holds true for eBooks, too.)

@Doug: I suspect that a lot of folks got interested in fonts, in the digital age because unlike print--now, they could control it. ;-)

Hitch

[theducks]

Hitch
You meann I should not use 'rickety Old Typewriter' font??
But that looks JUST like what the Author used

But it looks just like what comes off of the machine that is stashed on the top shelf in the garage

[Toxaris]

Fonts are tricky. Usually I just don't add them and let the reader use the fonts on the device. However, in some cases it can add something to the reading experience. Think about headers or example or what about a note (e.g. a letter) in the text. There it can add to it.
In some cases I change the body font, Caslon is very nice and is very usable for e-ink. For some people I change the body font for a font that is suitable for dyslexic. With those fonts they can read much more easily. I think that all readers should have a built-in font for dyslexic people anyway.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by theducks

Hitch
You meann I should not use 'rickety Old Typewriter' font??
But that looks JUST like what the Author used

But it looks just like what comes off of the machine that is stashed on the top shelf in the garage

If you only knew how many eBooks are out there with "Typewriter" font, Ducky, if you only knew. (And yes...we did them...not my choice, don't burn me at the stake, kids...)

Originally Posted by Toxaris

Fonts are tricky. Usually I just don't add them and let the reader use the fonts on the device. However, in some cases it can add something to the reading experience. Think about headers or example or what about a note (e.g. a letter) in the text. There it can add to it.
In some cases I change the body font, Caslon is very nice and is very usable for e-ink. For some people I change the body font for a font that is suitable for dyslexic. With those fonts they can read much more easily. I think that all readers should have a built-in font for dyslexic people anyway.

I confess to some mad Caslon love myself. I also like Bembo, a LOT. (Because there's almost no Garamond that works on an eReader, unless it's already on the device. Embedding it? {shudders}). As Jon noted, Baskerville is good. We've used Janson as a faux-Garamond, when a client just could NOT move off of Garamond, because it's a heavier font. It's a damn near dupe of G...just heavier which works better in the Kindleverse.

Ah, fonts.

How the hell did we get here, from full size images, any-damned-way? This isn't my fault, is it?

Hitch

[DiapDealer]

Just gonna throw it out there: at a reasonable size, neither of those posted fonts would cause me that much grief while reading. *shrug*

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Just gonna throw it out there: at a reasonable size, neither of those posted fonts would cause me that much grief while reading. *shrug*

Now you're just trying to tease me. :-)

Hitch

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Now you're just trying to tease me. :-)

Hitch

No seriously. I'm just not that font-sensitive. That's what I've been trying to tell you--there's clearly a gene missing or something.

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

No seriously. I'm just not that font-sensitive. That's what I've been trying to tell you--there's clearly a gene missing or something.

You were probably font desensitised as a boy by reading too many IETF RFCs

BR

[Notjohn]

Originally Posted by theducks

Hitch
You meann I should not use 'rickety Old Typewriter' font??
But that looks JUST like what the Author used

But it looks just like what comes off of the machine that is stashed on the top shelf in the garage

There is a Canadian lawyer who writes a series about a Canadian lawyer and publishes them through KDP Print. He chose Courier as his font. When he saw the result, he thought that Courier looked rather thin. So he reformatted the book and bolded everything. He was so delighted with the result that all his subsequent books are entirely in Courier bold.

https://www.amazon.com/Parade-Dead-L.../dp/1987888154

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Notjohn

There is a Canadian lawyer who writes a series about a Canadian lawyer and publishes them through KDP Print. He chose Courier as his font. When he saw the result, he thought that Courier looked rather thin. So he reformatted the book and bolded everything. He was so delighted with the result that all his subsequent books are entirely in Courier bold.

https://www.amazon.com/Parade-Dead-L.../dp/1987888154

I know, I saw that thread. {shudders delicately}.

Hitch

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

No seriously. I'm just not that font-sensitive. That's what I've been trying to tell you--there's clearly a gene missing or something.

I believe you, I do. I can't quite put myself in your shoes, but...doesn't mean I don't love ya, anyway.

Hitch

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

No seriously. I'm just not that font-sensitive. That's what I've been trying to tell you--there's clearly a gene missing or something.

For me, I'm most font sensitive is when the font is too light weight for eInk. Free Serif, Free Mono, & Free Sans-Serif are three fonts that should be deleted forever and the creator(s) sent to Purgatory now. They are way way too light for any real use and they don't actually look all that good.