Yeah, that is also my biggest problem with it. I might move towards Merriweather, which has a larger font-size, but fits a bit less with the theme of the page.
Ok, after looking into all of these (and some others I found), I decided to go with Warnock Pro, which had a much larger x-height, while also preserving most of the aesthetic that I care about.
Let me know in case anything renders badly on Windows machines. I am currently working on setting up the caption version of the font for small post-previews on the frontpage, and seeing whether the Display version of the font might work better for our larger heading sizes.
Thanks a lot for the recommendations. This saved me a lot of work, and I really appreciate your help in all of this.
Further feedback: I know you’re still working on the site’s typography, and what I see isn’t final, but I do want to register a strong suggestion that you increase the point size of the text—especially of the comments. I have to zoom to 150% to read it comfortably, on my 22″ desktop display. (I would recommend a point size of 21px.)
re: rendering: I haven’t checked Windows yet, but on all the Linux installs I’ve got, the text seems to render fine (although the effect of the small point size is even more pronounced; zooming is absolutely necessary for it to be readable).
Yeah, I think increasing the font-size on posts a bit makes sense, though to do that I will also have to increase the central column width, since we are otherwise approaching a fairly low number of characters per line, but that should be doable.
While I agree that increasing the font-size on comments is more necessary, I am also worried that it’s by far the most costly there, since increasing the height of any individual comment makes skimming the comment threads a lot more difficult.
I will give redisigning the comment area a try sometime in the next few days, and depending on how that goes, I might actually end up going with a sans-serif for the comments, which should then increase readability at the smaller font-sizes we have right now. FB seems to get away with a 12px font-size, which I do think is a bit too small, but it generally still seems fairly readable.
I think the new font looks pretty good. I do think though for a body font the x-height is pretty small which makes is less readable.
Yeah, that is also my biggest problem with it. I might move towards Merriweather, which has a larger font-size, but fits a bit less with the theme of the page.
If you have access to Typekit, then here are some other typefaces to consider:
Arno Pro
Chaparral Pro
Kepler
Utopia
Warnock Pro
(There are of course many other good choices on Typekit, but I list these because:
they are good, readable text fonts
they all have larger x-heights than Garamond Premier Pro
I think you may like them w.r.t. theme fit
they also include a similar selection of optical sizes
)
Ok, after looking into all of these (and some others I found), I decided to go with Warnock Pro, which had a much larger x-height, while also preserving most of the aesthetic that I care about.
Let me know in case anything renders badly on Windows machines. I am currently working on setting up the caption version of the font for small post-previews on the frontpage, and seeing whether the Display version of the font might work better for our larger heading sizes.
Thanks a lot for the recommendations. This saved me a lot of work, and I really appreciate your help in all of this.
Glad to help.
Further feedback: I know you’re still working on the site’s typography, and what I see isn’t final, but I do want to register a strong suggestion that you increase the point size of the text—especially of the comments. I have to zoom to 150% to read it comfortably, on my 22″ desktop display. (I would recommend a point size of 21px.)
re: rendering: I haven’t checked Windows yet, but on all the Linux installs I’ve got, the text seems to render fine (although the effect of the small point size is even more pronounced; zooming is absolutely necessary for it to be readable).
Yeah, I think increasing the font-size on posts a bit makes sense, though to do that I will also have to increase the central column width, since we are otherwise approaching a fairly low number of characters per line, but that should be doable.
While I agree that increasing the font-size on comments is more necessary, I am also worried that it’s by far the most costly there, since increasing the height of any individual comment makes skimming the comment threads a lot more difficult.
I will give redisigning the comment area a try sometime in the next few days, and depending on how that goes, I might actually end up going with a sans-serif for the comments, which should then increase readability at the smaller font-sizes we have right now. FB seems to get away with a 12px font-size, which I do think is a bit too small, but it generally still seems fairly readable.
Oh, excellent! I will look at all of them.