text

Hey guys,

Can some one give me a breakdown of the difference of text. Which text are sans and which are sans serif, and ones don't interlace properly. It is such a pain when you don't know!


thanks again,
J

The idea is not to use text that has fine lines of only one horizontal pixel because it will flicker on and off due to interlacing. Serif fonts are fonts with serifs - thin detail edges. You can tell them by the way they look - look at Times for instance. Sans serif fonts don't have serifs, so they have blocky edges - look at Helvetica, Impact, Verdana. There's no definitive list - you tell by looking at the font. Even a serif font will display fine if it's large enough.

There is much more to working with text and video - search kenstone.net for some very good text tutorials.
Mark

thanks for the info mark,

just what i was looking for!


appreciate it,
J

Mark: Please take this a respecful opinion and not a rebuttal or anything.
But I really disagree with this widespread notion about serifed typefaces. IMO, it's something that became true because of repetition, not because of the actual truth in it.
It's partially true and thus also partially false.

Most serif fonts were designed for high resolution printed output at 600 dpi, which is much much higher than any computer or video screen.

Because of this, when they are used at small sizes (especially in heavily compressed formats) they produce horrors, that's true. Not just because of the flickering (which can be solved easily) but simply because their beautiful identity (in cases where that's true) is simply not there when used at small sizes on computer or video monitors. Their highly detailed nature also produces nasty compression artifacts with DV, HDV and other highly compressed formats.

BUT.... Instead of taking as a rule "sans are nice, serif are bad as video",we can propose this other rule: "Sans are nice for video at sizes from 20-25 pixels, whereas Serifs are nice for video when they are at least twice that size". So, here we go, serifed typefaces can have an important place in the video world, when used at medium and large sizes for display/titles/heads. Not a bad addition at all, given what a powerful contrast they can produce in design terms when combined with sans serif type.

There's a world of beauty for motion graphics with amazing faces like Warnock, Mrs. Eaves, Adobe Garamond Pro, Nu Swift, etc... as long as you set them at 60-70 px or more and avoid the thin/ultra lite variantes. All the flicker, compression artifacts go away and their beauty fills the screen.

Mark: if you disagree, have my respects. If you consider this opinion valuable, help me reverse this notion that is so widespread and reduces the creative possibilities instead of enlarging them.

Just my two cents, as people say there.

All the best,
Adolfo



markspencer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The idea is not to use text that has fine lines of
> only one horizontal pixel because it will flicker
> on and off due to interlacing. Serif fonts are
> fonts with serifs - thin detail edges. You can
> tell them by the way they look - look at Times for
> instance. Sans serif fonts don't have serifs, so
> they have blocky edges - look at Helvetica,
> Impact, Verdana. There's no definitive list - you
> tell by looking at the font. Even a serif font
> will display fine if it's large enough.
>
> There is much more to working with text and video
> - search kenstone.net for some very good text
> tutorials.
> Mark

Adolfo Rozenfeld
Buenos Aires - Argentina
www.adolforozenfeld.com

Adolfo, I totally agree with you - I think I even said that serif fonts at larger sizes work just fine - you, however, explained my point much better than I did, so thank you!

Oh, I didn't read that part. Silly me.
Amazing how one does this kind of speed reading in forums and many times misses important things
All the best

Adolfo Rozenfeld
Buenos Aires - Argentina
www.adolforozenfeld.com