[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GMG-Devel] [Social-mediagoblin] MediaGoblin: the Logo

From: Christopher Allan Webber
Subject: Re: [GMG-Devel] [Social-mediagoblin] MediaGoblin: the Logo
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 18:11:56 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Neither Cabin nor Lato look so un-serious where they look badly out of
place with something serious to me.

I'd be happy with either of those, though I do think i like Lato's width
a bit more.  I'm not very strongly opinionated.

Jef van Schendel <address@hidden> writes:

> 2011/7/28 Thorsten Wilms <address@hidden>:
>> It would be good to select a font for continuous text, harmonious with the
>> custom type, which could be tweaked to improve the match, while keeping it
>> unique.
>> The font should have bold and italic styles. Have a look at
> Ok so I've played around with this collection for a while, here are
> some thoughts.
> For a quick and dirty reference, here are five screenshots of a
> regular MediaGoblin media page with these 5 typefaces applied:
> So for me one of the main things is that it should be something that
> not only looks good, but is recognizable and friendly while at the
> same time fitting with many different content types.
> - I don't think Arimo and Istok look as good as the others. Arimo has
> something similar to Arial which I've never liked, but I can't quite
> put my finger on what that thing is. It makes sense that it resembles
> Arial though, because according to its description it's "metrically
> compatible". With both Istok and Arimo it's not so much "oh, these
> look awful" but more "I don't think these look as good as the rest".
> They both seem a bit bland to me.
> - Cabin seems very fun. It looks cheery and a bit playful, but I think
> this is a problem, too. What if we have content that isn't happy and
> sunny at all? I like it, but I think that it would fit less well with
> certain types of content.
> - Lato. Now this one I really, really like. It has several unique
> things that set it apart from the different platforms' default
> sans-serifs. It doesn't seem like your old standard font, it's more
> refreshing than that. But it also isn't too distracting. I guess that
> was also the aim, as we can read in the description[1]. I've been
> using this for the last couple of weeks and I'm really fond of it.
> However I'm still not sure if it will be suitable for many types of
> content. It *might* be, but I'd really like the opinion of others on
> this one... For instance, have a look at this screenshot[2. It's a
> silly example, but what do you think? Does that clash too much? Is it
> jarring or do you think it can work?
> Anyhow, these are some short thoughts. I'm very much an amateur when
> it comes to typography, so maybe what I said is all nonsense.
> Jef
> [1]
> [2] 
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> address@hidden


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]