Best and Worst Fonts

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

fucking lmao

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

Well, I mean...

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

God damn, all those fonts that guy made all look absolutely awful.

I'm not much of a typography person, but I would THINK the first priority of creating a typeface of any kind would be to make it GOD DAMN LEGIBLE

Like... what even are those fonts in that link? Jesus F-en F.

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

They are such overused fonts though too. Super tacky; those kinds of fonts turned me off so much that I have to custom texture any font I want to have that grunge font, to fit a unique design. It cannot look like someone else's brush fucked font.

Also it's pretty basic but I like Aaux Pro. And geogrotesque.

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

I like the one where it's pictures instead of letters.

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

the real question is how many of you font elitists are the same people who would needlessly insert colors, guidelines, or stupid shapes into visual data display

thats a trick question

all of you would

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

AYY LMAO GILL SANS



Please don't use Gill Sans.
The R makes me sad. The Q and p aren't nice either.

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

Default has been working fine for me for years

Times New Roman is also legit


90s Website Typefront or anything with pictures as the letters are sh*t that should have never happened

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

i was at a hotel and their room numbers and signs were done using papyrus

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

I unironically used this in an upcoming GFX set in one of my packs.


It's for a steel drum and guitar song that also features a sexy sax solo, though, so I feel justified.

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

i think gill sans looks nice

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

What's your opinion of Frutiger, Syntax, and Bliss? All three of these fall under the same sans-serif classification of being Humanist Sans, with slightly different variations between American and European designs.

The thing with Humanist Sans typefaces is that the uppercase proportions are derived from Roman capital letters, meanwhile the lowercase have a distinct design to mimic the feel of human handwriting and calligraphy. Humanist Sans weren't really an innovation in terms of a classification itself, but more that it became a stabilizing form of sans serif to be used for sign making / sign writing specifically. It was what really introduced a basic monoline "block" letter based upon classical roman proportions, which had not been previously done before in the form of traditional metal type and casting.

With that being said, Gill Sans was originally designed as a display face for signage, before its popularity in usage lead to its adoption as a text typeface. Although it doesn't necessarily look appealing as a text face, there's no doubt that Gill Sans' popularity is attributed to its absolute clarity as a display face. Also to note, Neo-Grotesque sans-serif typefaces like Helvetica and Univers weren't designed until the 1950s, meanwhile Gill Sans was designed in the late 1920s. In short, you can attribute the entirety of monoline "block" letters to Gill Sans' creation because without it, you wouldn't have Helvetica's monotonous letterforms. The more you know.

P.S. Helvetica is the pinnacle of boring. It's admittedly nice, but it's the most basic bitch font.

Re: Best and Worst Fonts

Helvetica is the English porn of type faces