Very nice list! I recently also wrote on this topic: http://sachagreif.com/google-webfonts-that-dont-suck/
I'd like to see this list but your site seems to be down.
Beautiful web type: highlighting the best of the Google web fonts directory
41–45 of 45 posts
Re: Beautiful web type: highlighting the best of the Google web fonts directory
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh man, don't use Arimo, or its identical twin Liberation Sans. It is to Arial what Arial is to Helvetica; a metrics-compatible replacement that tries to do its own thing and winds up just awkward. The stupid little serif on J annoys me to no end, and all the capitals look almost like small-caps compared to the lower-case. By contrast, Open Sans is lovely, go nuts with it. :)
Thanks for the feedback :D I need a good alternative to Arial. Do you have any other recommendations from google web fonts?
Re: Beautiful web type: highlighting the best of the Google web fonts directory
#43While that looks really pretty, it's not really useful. This could have been a great article if they hadn't just gone for the easy eye candy but instead actually discuss the fonts in question? - name of the font - style of the font (sans, slab-serif, etc) - who made the font, what style is it based on, what was the designer's purpose/goal with this font - what does the author of the article think the font is good for…
This is helpful feedback. This is a very new project, so I am still iterating on my approach. Over time it will evolve. Maybe in the future you will find it more useful for your needs.
Re: Beautiful web type: highlighting the best of the Google web fonts directory
#44I really appreciate that this site uses interesting quotes rather than lorem ipsum. It makes it less boring to trawl through different fonts.
...and more difficult to compare them.
These typefaces should not necessarily be compared to each other. Every typeface has contexts where it works better than other contexts. I've tried to use each typeface in a way that highlights its positive attributes and minimizes its negative ones.
Re: Beautiful web type: highlighting the best of the Google web fonts directory
#45While that looks really pretty, it's not really useful. This could have been a great article if they hadn't just gone for the easy eye candy but instead actually discuss the fonts in question? - name of the font - style of the font (sans, slab-serif, etc) - who made the font, what style is it based on, what was the designer's purpose/goal with this font - what does the author of the article think the font is good for…
You have a good point about the manual kerning (not sure what's up with that), but I don't agree with any of your other criticisms. This is basically what typeface catalogs are like: a demo of a particular face.
- name of the font
who cares. click through to find out
- style of the font (sans, slab-serif, etc)
you need someone to tell you that? I don't understand.
- who made the font, what style is it based on, what was the designer's purpose/goal with this font
who cares. click through to find out
- how complete is the font, what characters does it support, quite a few of them don't even have most of the basic symbols from lower ASCII, that's pretty important to be aware of or you get unpleasant surprises long after the design is done
Yes, that information is clearly visible when you click through.
Imagine explaining to a client you designed a website for, that if they need to add new content to the CMS, they must manually kern the headlines! ... errr ... manually do the whut now?
Yes, you'd look like an idiot if you did that.