Where you see overuse, I see equity in familiarity and backward compatibility. However, we may be comparing apples to oranges. One is more about interesting styles in culture, while the other is more about convenience. It’s a tradeoff.
These days, I’d be surprised if a critical mass of people notice the difference. I’m looking at younger generations who are rejecting traditional media and all the styles that come with it. When it comes to page layout or styles, they have distinction blindness. Low expectations seem to be the norm these days. Maybe I’m just looking for professionalism in all the wrong places.
What if you create a comic strip and need a typeface? It’s exactly what the font was created for no?
Yeah, that’s a good point. On this whole subject, I’m not arguing that I’m right and others are wrong. I’m just sharing some of my personal viewpoints that influence the way I do things. I suppose I’m one who prefers to walk off to the side of the trail.
What do you think about Monotypes new version of Helvetica they’re calling Helvetica Now?
You’re probably going to laugh at me for this, but it actually makes my point about web fonts. I went to their page to see the difference. Because I’m using an older computer, I’m also using an older browser that I guess is not compatible. All the examples they are showing of Helvetica Now appear as Times Roman in my browser.
Backwards compatibility is one of my main values for political reasons, not financial or professional reasons. As much as I prefer Apple, I’m close to abandoning them for lack of backward compatibility alone.
I had to do a google image search to see the difference. First I had to ignore the bad kerning in the examples. I hope that’s not built into the font. I can see some subtle differences with the longer protrusions, especially with the “t” character. I guess that helps readability. I don’t know if it’s going to be enough of a difference to sacrifice backward compatibility for all the old people refusing to upgrade.
1 Like
For some reason it is difficult for me to visualize the Peanuts comic strip using Comic Sans. Oh oh – can you imagine Moebius using that?
Comic Sans is a very well designed typeface with a limited number of relevant contexts for use. It’s use outside of the proper contexts is what draws criticism. Many people use it as an informal font because it is the only informal font they have (it was supplied as standard on several OSes).
From an aesthetics standpoint, it is pleasing in its own context. Yet, to apply to a real comic strip, its sameness becomes its own downfall. I’d admit there are cases where Comic Sans fits the purpose. Can’t think of any offhand.
I was thinking more…Marmaduke!