Last week, we did a quick exercise in class where we had to choose two fonts that we didn’t like, one that is a maybe and two that is a like. After that, in group, we had to discuss about that and choose out of all people choice those that we don’t like, those that are a maybe and those that we did like.
Comic Sans MS is simply a big NO. It is just too round. I can’t use it for serious business but neither for casual thing, I just feel that it is not enough serious for work and not enough pretty for design.
Using Papyrus for design is simply WRONG (http://www.iheartpapyrus.com/). Just don’t.
Futura is not a bad one, but I don’t like it either… It is maybe just too narrow, but it is clean enough to use it for serious business. However, having the choice to use something else or Futura, I would chose the something else option.
Bebas is good font for title. It is massive,e but still balance enough to appreciate it.
American Typewriter is classic one to me. Years ago, this font would have been in the big NO category, but now, I just find it clean, simple, yet beautiful to look at.
Then, we also had a design brief to start (due the january 24th) and the 1.4 sketches had to be ready for the january 17th.
Take my “Pretty Jesus ” or Bringhurst’s “these poems” or Niatum’s “The Art of Clay“(section 3.1, p. 25 of .pdf). Create three different typographic treatments of the selected poem, each of which represent three different ways of reading or responding to the poem. You can manipulate other aspects of the ap¨pearance as well, if you wish. For each setting, write a very short description that explains your treatment.
I chose “these poems”. So far, this is what I did.
The far left one, I use mainly the repetition of words to stylised the text. The middle one, I use the tone of the voice to color the text: paler it is, lower the voice is, darker it is, louder it is. The last one, I try to express abstractly the poem. This exercise is still a work in progress.