# Suggestions for best font to type with



## Jim Davis (26 Jun 2009)

Whats the best font to use for business letters and the office in general.  Times new roman looks terrible and Arial is doesnt look great in letters.  I'm thinking either Cailibri or Verdana, can anyone make any suggestions?


----------



## DrMoriarty (26 Jun 2009)

Garamond 12pt has a nice, clean, 'chiselled' look to it (and in MS Word, the apostrophes and quotation marks become 'smart', i.e. 66/99-style...).


----------



## shaking (26 Jun 2009)

I use arial 11, find it the easiest to read


----------



## Jim Davis (26 Jun 2009)

Garamond is almost identical to times new roman.


----------



## woodbine (26 Jun 2009)

Another satisfied Garamond customer here.


----------



## mathepac (26 Jun 2009)

Both Calibri (?) and Verdana are sans serif fonts with only subtle differences between them (e.g. capital i, j, q). They may lack the formality of a serif font for business correspondence, but each to their own and a lot depends on the impression you want to create with your correspondence.

Verdana, because of its lack of fuss, its clarity and ready availability is used in lots of web-sites.

Personally I use a modified, licenced Garamond, a serif font, for formal letters. I can't reproduce it here but something like - 

The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.


----------



## Caveat (26 Jun 2009)

Jim Davis said:


> Verdana


 
I always use this or ... the similar if a little more sedate,_ Tahoma_.

Agree that _Times_ looks awful - very conservative & authoritative. Tends to be the font of choice for solicitors/auditors etc as far as I can see.


----------



## Tinker Bell (26 Jun 2009)

+1


----------



## Caveat (26 Jun 2009)

DrMoriarty said:


> and in MS Word, the apostrophes and quotation marks become 'smart', i.e. 66/99-style...).


 
Good point - that's worth knowing.

(That was in _Georgia_ by the way )


----------



## mathepac (26 Jun 2009)

Caveat said:


> ...
> Agree that _Times_ looks awful - very conservative & authoritative. Tends to be the font of choice for solicitors/auditors etc as far as I can see.


For years it was the default font for multi-user WordPerfect packages installed on old Unix systems in solicitors / accountants offices!


----------



## DrMoriarty (26 Jun 2009)

I forgot to mention that Garamond also _italicises_ beautifully. 

Times New Roman is for people who believe it's beneath (or beyond?) them to change the default typeface.


----------



## enol (26 Jun 2009)

Serif fonts (times, garamond etc) are the standard traditional fonts, commonly used by solicitors, accountants etc, as stated previously by another user. Sans Serif fonts (futura, gill sans, calibri) are used to give a more contemporary, friendly look; less threatening than serif fonts. It depends on the message you are trying to convey;
traditional & unmistakedly formal =  Serif
contemporary & friendly = Sans Serif

Type in letters should not be above 10pt. Anything above that looks like a letter to someone with a sight impedement.

Trust me, I'm a graphic designer


----------



## Jim Davis (26 Jun 2009)

enol said:


> Serif fonts (times, garamond etc) are the standard traditional fonts, commonly used by solicitors, accountants etc, as stated previously by another user. Sans Serif fonts (futura, gill sans, calibri) are used to give a more contemporary, friendly look; less threatening than serif fonts. It depends on the message you are trying to convey;
> traditional & unmistakedly formal = Serif
> contemporary & friendly = Sans Serif
> 
> ...


 
I think 10pt is a bit small though, especially for Calibri I tend to go for 11pt.  Below are a list of the fonts mentioned above.

Garamond
Times New Roman
Tahoma
Calibri
Verdana
Arial


----------



## MOB (29 Jun 2009)

enol said:


> ..........Type in letters should not be above 10pt. Anything above that looks like a letter to someone with a sight impedement.
> 
> Trust me, I'm a graphic designer



I have to disagree.  10pt in Times New Roman ( at least in MS Word) is tiny.  Most people would use 12 or even 13 in this font.


----------



## Mel (29 Jun 2009)

Another rule of thumb is to use a serif font for printed material, and sans-serif for screen reading, websites and so on. 
Research has been done on this, and the serif font is easier to read on paper, and the latter on screen. 

I use Arial 10 for most things that will be viewed on the screen, and Times New Roman for printing - if it's not broke... 
For Garamond you'll probably need to go up 1-point size compared to Times NR to make it legible.  
I don't like Tahoma, I think it's too informal, and don't get me started on Comic Sans... Gill Sans isn't a bad sans-serif font.


----------



## Seamu$ (30 Jun 2009)

Jim Davis said:


> I think 10pt is a bit small though, especially for Calibri I tend to go for 11pt. Below are a list of the fonts mentioned above.
> 
> Garamond
> Times New Roman
> ...


 
Great thread, was just looking to find a nice font & found some good suggestions here. 

Have recently just started using Calibri but what do you think of Trebuchet MS as a sans serif font?


----------



## Caveat (30 Jun 2009)

Whilst I quite like both of these, I think _Calibri_ looks like it belongs in the text of a Powerpoint presentation or something more so than a letter.

Similarly, _Trubuchet MS_ reminds me of the quoted, highlighted extracts that appear during magazine interviews.


----------



## Graham_07 (30 Jun 2009)

Caveat said:


> I always use this or ... the similar if a little more sedate,_ Tahoma_.
> 
> Agree that _Times_ looks awful - very conservative & authoritative. Tends to be the font of choice for solicitors/auditors etc as far as I can see.


 

Cringing......better get rid of my Times 11 point right away


----------



## Caveat (30 Jun 2009)

Graham_07 said:


> Cringing......better get rid of my Times 11 point right away


 
You should start using _chiller_ Graham for those stern warning letters


----------



## shesells (30 Jun 2009)

I use Goudy Old Style for my letters. Still formal enough but a million times better than Times New Roman! Experimented recently with Sylfaen but decided it was a bit too clear if you know what I mean?


----------



## AlbacoreA (30 Jun 2009)

enol said:


> ....
> 
> Type in letters should not be above 10pt. Anything above that looks like a letter to someone with a sight impedement.
> 
> Trust me, I'm a graphic designer


 
I think many designers in general are prone to using fonts and sizes that are fashionable and suited only to those with very good eye sight, as in the young. If you work with older users and I'm sure users with less than perfect sight, or poor sight. You realise theres an awful lot of people that just can't read smaller fonts. Or off beat colour combinations. Most of these designs are never tested against users properly. 

I find the best compromise is Arial. People are used to it, so it doesn't look out of place on formal letters, and obviously its very clear on a monitor. If you were trying to create a specific impression, legal, financial, modern, you might use something else. It very much depends on the contex. 

So the answer to best font has to be "it depends"


----------

