the page order reads:
2 Columns
Times 8.5/13.8
Times 7.5/14.6
Times 8/14.3
Times 9/13.1
Times Bold 7.5/14.3
Times Bold 8/13.8
Times Bold 8.5/13.4
Times Bold 9/12.3
Arial 7.5/13.8
Arial 8/13.6
Arial 8.5/12.7
Arial 9/12.1
Arial Bold 7.5/13.3
Arial Bold 8/12.3
Arial Bold 8.5/11.9
Arial Bold 9/11.3
3 Columns
Times 7.5/15.8
Times 8/15.2
Times 8.5/14.3
Times 9/13.8
Times Bold 7.5/15.2
Times Bold 8/14.4
Times Bold 8.5/13.8
Times Bold 9/12.7
Arial 7.5/14.6
Arial 8/13.8
Arial 8.5/13.4
Arial 9/12.5
Arial Bold 7.5/13.7
Arial Bold 8/12.9
Arial Bold 8.5/12.3
Arial Bold 9/12.2
After producing the 32 page document we analysed it in groups to see which was more readable and what effect leading had. Our group found that for 3 columns the body text that made use of Times New Roman size 8.5 was the most readable once we began reading. There were some debates about how it looked aesthetically, but practically it was the easiest to read. The examples of type where there was more leading seemed to appeal to people more and made the body text look like the content may be more interesting and that there was less text. The most readable example made some people think that it was boring and they wouldn't want to read it. I think this raises something that needs to be considered when producing a body text, can you compromise readability to ensure that someone will want to read it, or should you make a text as readable as possible with the risk of it not looking as good.
The context/amount of type will probably be the deciding factor for this. For example readability plays less of a concern when adding some text to a poster whereas a book/article would need to be as readable as possible.
Across the class we all found that a seriffed typeface was the easiest to read and that 8-9 was the ideal size.
No comments:
Post a Comment