Font Readability Study

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Rick Cook

    Font Readability Study

    ACM SIGCHI is the leading international community of students and professionals interested in research, education, and practical applications of Human Computer Interaction.


    I ran across this while researching something else and I thought those
    of you interested in the readability of various fonts might find it
    worthwhile.

    (NB: If you want to argue about this some more, count me out. I resigned
    from the Verdana thread because it had become simply tedious and
    killfiled a couple of the participants because I found them utterly
    unproductive.)

    --RC
  • SeaPlusPlus

    #2
    Re: Font Readability Study

    Rick Cook wrote:
    [color=blue]
    > http://www.acm.org/sigchi/chi95/proc...st/tst_bdy.htm[/color]
    [color=blue]
    > I ran across this while researching something else and I thought those
    > of you interested in the readability of various fonts might find it
    > worthwhile.[/color]
    [color=blue]
    > (NB: If you want to argue about this some more, count me out. I resigned
    > from the Verdana thread because it had become simply tedious and
    > killfiled a couple of the participants because I found them utterly
    > unproductive.)[/color]

    This study has a copyright of 1995 and doesn't include the fonts
    optimized for the web since then... i.e. Georgia Verdana...

    I think there has got to be something later than this... ;-) ...maybe...

    Thank you...

    Rich

    Comment

    • Stan Brown

      #3
      Re: Font Readability Study

      "Rick Cook" wrote in comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.stylesheets:[color=blue]
      >http://www.acm.org/sigchi/chi95/proc...st/tst_bdy.htm[/color]

      The methodology seems at least _possibly_ reliable for this one.
      (Why two threads, by the way?)

      I was surprised to see that 9.75 MS Sans Serif rates high. I guess
      someone in the original Windows design team must have done some
      actual user testing. :-)

      --

      Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
      Dragon222 adalah situs slot gacor terbaru yang selalu memberikan banyak bonus menarik dan kemenangan JP untuk pemain setia selama bermain di link slot DRAGON222.

      Comment

      • Lauri Raittila

        #4
        Re: Font Readability Study

        in comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.stylesheets, Stan Brown wrote:[color=blue]
        > "Rick Cook" wrote in comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.stylesheets:[color=green]
        > >http://www.acm.org/sigchi/chi95/proc...st/tst_bdy.htm[/color]
        >
        > The methodology seems at least _possibly_ reliable for this one.
        > (Why two threads, by the way?)[/color]

        It includes 3 fonts that don't have any of the sizes they used:
        MS Serif, Small fonts, MS Sans serif are all bitmap fonts, and none of
        them has any of the sizes used in test, so it raises some questions...

        And again, uses same display settings and monitor as previous ones

        I would like to see test with:

        - sizes from way too small to too big (now the samples are cut, so we
        have no idea if even bigger font would get even better results - I would
        like to see when curve starts going down again)
        - different display settings and monitor quality, this far, everything
        has been on the most common one, but it is not like 1024*768@17"@96 'dpi'
        is even majority today
        - compared to what user would set her/himself (if user is used to font,
        it might have big )
        - how very common vision problems do difference
        [color=blue]
        > I was surprised to see that 9.75 MS Sans Serif rates high. I guess
        > someone in the original Windows design team must have done some
        > actual user testing. :-)[/color]

        That is propably because bitmap fonts don't suffer as much from scaling,
        because they are usually not scaled... It is 10pt MS serif, not 9.75pt,
        of course...

        --
        Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
        Utrecht, NL.

        Comment

        Working...