Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Design and Graphics' started by iAppleseed, May 26, 2012.
Which one is better for the title or the headlines? And for the body?
For what kind of project, objective, function, etc etc ??
The problem Myriad now has, and that similarly affected (Apple) Garamond albeit to a lesser degree, is that it's now so synonymous with Apple.
Whereas Helvetica is the king of neutral. Its biggest strength is in that neutrality.
One could easily argue that Helvetica's biggest problem is that it's so common and overused that it's synonymous with lazy graphic designers who don't know how to select fonts.
Tip: polls on MR: probably not the ideal way to choose
Nah, that's Arial.
Arial is and always has been a cheap rip-off of Helvetica.
Impact, white, with a black stoke.
Perhaps by designers, but not people in general.
I saw an old Apple ad that used Apple Garamond and thought the font looked affected and dated.
I haven't yet seen Myriad Pro in that same negative light ... except when they add the cheesy gradient to it.
People in general are unlikely to know the difference between Helvetica, Arial, Akzidenz-Grotesk or even Myriad. People in general don't care about typefaces, typography or Graphic Design in general.
I was speaking as a designer, in the design forum, in a thread on the subject of typography.
There's no right or wrong
merely opinion, and I'd choose Helvetica between the two, for the reasons (though they're not the only ones of course) I gave above, not because I'm a lazy designer that doesn't know how to select a typeface of course.
Sure they do.
They may not be able to tell you the difference between Helvetica and Myriad, but people in general do care and respond to typefaces, typography or graphic design.
They respond to good design just as you might respond to a well cooked meal in a restaurant. You don't have to understand all the ingredients and techniques to know that it tastes good.
I can recommend FF Dax Condensed Bold for the title or the headlines:
Frankly, I think serif fonts look rather classy for headlines.
(ie. refer to Arstechnica redesign)
I'm not really sure what that means but are you saying that you don't like Myriad because it looks like Apple?
i've just noticed the erroneous 'in general' at the end of the sentence I posted, it should've have finished with just 'Design'.
I think you might be taking my comment a little too literally.
I was speaking in terms of the actual technical discipline, the process, the genesis of typefaces, typography and graphic design, rather than just the pretty finished product for example. Hence my comment about me speaking as designer, in a design forum in a thread about choosing typefaces. Though rereading my original sentence, I can see why it could be interpreted as suggesting a general indifference by people to Graphic Design, which is of course absurd and would also mean that I'd be out of a job of course.
They do, but for example, would the general person care whether the typeface used was Helvetica or Myriad, or the process that was undertaken or why the decision to use one or the other was made? To use your food analogy… I would suggest that the general person doesn't care about such things, rather as long as it looks good…
Whereas designers in general, cannot demonstrate such indifference, which leads back to the considerations that designers make when choosing a suitable typeface.
I'm not saying I don't like Myriad, more its current saturation because of its association with Apple rather than on its own merits for example.
I agree. It's just sad. Everyday, I come across poorly designed billboard ads and I know that those ads will look better instantly by proper choice of fonts.
LOL!!!!!!! Thanks so much - I needed that. Actually I think both Myriad and Helvetica have their places. Helvetica Neue is a very nice font, especially when kerned properly. But it does depend on usage.
Avenir is also very nice, in case the OP wants to consider it.