4 years ago from Darian Rosebrook, Senior UX Designer
I really respect that this type foundry is creating some really decent fonts, but the characteristics for this typeface seem a little off. It may grow on me as a display style, but I'm not sure.
Thoughts?
This one is a miss in my opinion. Think it probably would have looked and worked quite a bit better if they didn't add the angled brackets.
Exactly. But I think it would look alright if the type wasn't blow up too big.
I agree — I like the idea of the brackets, but they're too subtle so it just kind of sits in that "is it supposed to be like that" space
Don't get distracted with typeface pollution.
Use system fonts for web projects and the Vignelli 5 for everything else. If Massimo can work a legendary design career with a strict typeface palette so can you.
Also, there is no need to listen to any new music. The great composers captured every human experience there is and ever will be in a plethora of beautiful compositions.
Just because it's new doesn't mean it's designed well, commonly available, and supported for different languages.
There's nothing this typeface does that Bodoni can't do. In fact, Bodoni has a much larger family and can do many things that Arlene cannot.
I do worship Vignelli's principle, although my «go to» typefaces still change from time to time.
Just because you can't use something for UX design, doesn't mean it's not good for anything else. Stop trying to be a blanket statement for something that can't be made into a blanket. As a designer of any kind trying to shut of potential solutions before having a problem doesn't really make for a good problem solver. This tool may not apply to problems you have but can and will apply to others.
Actually, shutting off potential solutions in the instance of typeface selection before the problem is actually important. This may or may not be the case for UX design tools and it is by no means a rule, only a principal.
There are benefits to being strict with the typefaces you use.
1.) Saves you a lot of time. You don't have to browse through hundreds of typefaces to get started. You can get up and running and start focusing on other aspects of the design or project.
2.) You can avoid using bad typefaces if you use ones that are known to be strong and successful. Especially in this example, Arlene is not designed well. Those brackets are absolutely horrendous.
3.) When a problem does arrive that has needs outside your restricted palette, you can research and use a typeface strategically and justifiably.
4.) A design will be more successful by knowing a smaller subset of of typefaces well.
If you want to waste many hours browsing through hundreds of bad typefaces every time you start a new project and use a typeface you're not familiar with then that's your business.
This would all be fine if fonts were only used for UX, and not for visual design. Which, contrary to designernews, does exist.
Typography is used for UX
https://conversionxl.com/blog/the-effects-of-typography-on-user-experience-conversions/#.
Typography is also an artform. I never at one point said it wasn't used for UX. I don't understand what you're getting at. Things can be used for more things than one is my entire point here. Display fonts typically aren't used for UX but for other projects.
Not everything with design is related to one specific type of "UX" sometimes the point is art. Or to be visually interesting.
You aren't linking me to anything that refutes what I'm saying, just going further down the UX side.
A prime example of how typefaces can be the primary driving force for UX. Highway signage is designed to be highly legible for harsh conditions, low lighting, and from far distances. It has absolutely nothing to do with visual design.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearview_(typeface)
I also recommend this to understand how people read. It could help you understand the importance of typography when it comes to UX design.
The black version is definitely the pick of the family. Seems something slightly awkward about it though. The ligatures are definitely wonky.
It's quirks might suit some application but there's definitely better high contrast serifs out there.
Wouldn't completely dismiss it but be hard to find a good fit.
Right. Sometimes unique typefaces like this really jive with a specific personality of a brand or event.
It's one of those "hold on to until you have an opportunity to try it" sort of fonts.
Yep! Thanks for sharing, might not of come across it otherwise.
Added to my 'challenging' font folder.
terribly ugly.
Login to Comment
You'll need to log in before you can leave a comment.
LoginRegister Today
New accounts can leave comments immediately, and gain full permissions after one week.
Register now