Thoughts?

Posted on Fri, 18 Nov 2011 by KiM

We received a newsletter from Squarespace (our blog host) that mentionned that they now have font options for all Google web fonts. I thought our old fonts were BORING so I went poking around and found one I kind of like. I am a big fan of cool fonts – as long as they are legible. What do you all think? (You in particular Jo since I didn’t run this past ya…..oops)

KiM says:

Sorry but we are not removing the "click to see more" feature. We post WAY too many photos per post to keep everything displaying on the home page. Then we'd have people complaining that they have to scroll too much.
I am hoping that one day Squarespace will add the feature where that link anchors to the spot you were at. (We could manually code it to do so but would be a pain in the arse, and I'd betcha we'd forget to do so most of the time).

Louise says:

I was a web designer in a previous life and I learned that sans serif fonts are easier to read on a screen and usually used on web sites and always black on white and serif is what is used on a printed media, like books. I think you can get a bit fancy on titles to give your page more of a design look, so the one you are using is good and nice and sans serif by the way . For the text of your posts and our comments, you are using a serif font however, like they use in books. I just checked Google, the actual Google site, and they are using a sans serif font, Arial I think. I also checked Adobe and Microsoft and they also use a sans serif font. I usually used Arial for the content text myself, it's really easier to read on screen. Sans serif is actually a world wide standard for the web. Web designers all over the world are following the W3C standards and guidelines to design their web sites. http://www.w3.org/ Hope this helps 🙂

Kevin says:

Kim: Regarding the "Click to Read More" would you consider having it open in a new window when you click so you don't lose your place on the main site. I find often times I want to browse more photos but then get frustrated when I hit the back button and have to figure out where I left off in the main posts? Just a thought….regardless the I like the new fonts (and as a fellow Squarespace user that email was like an early Christmas present!!!)

Kris says:

Nope, i don't like it too … sorry. After reading the comments, it seems that you had did some changes, but still … not good. The fonts seems too small for your blog and i have to squit my eyes while reading, and i feel a headache coming …

On the other hand, i'm quite OK with the "Click to Read More" feature. To prevent myself from losing where i had left off, i just right-click on the mouse ( either on the title or the "click to read more" ) and choose to either open in another tab or window. This way, i get to retain the original page and still read the full version of the post, and after reading, just close off that tab or window and i'm back to where i started. No problem at all …

Wendy says:

sorry . . . hate it.

RedScorpio says:

I like the header fonts a lot and I rather agree on the sans-serif suggestion for the main text. For example, the links under the search section, are not very legible, especially when Bold.

May I suggest sans serif fonts like Calibri, Trebuchet MS, Tahoma, Verdana or Segoe UI?

lisa says:

The font you chose for the ttles is condensed. It makes it less readable, and it also looks less bold than the body type. Please pick a differnt font, or version of this font- not condensed, and it should be as bold as, or bolder than the body type. That is why it looks too delicate in comparison to the body type. Every page has a heirarchy of information on it- Main heading, sub heading, body. The body should not stand out more than the sub heading.

Annie says:

Ok I am only noticing a new font on the titles.. it's almost a hand0written sans serif font. I think it is perfectly legible, BUT… It doesn't quite suit the flavour of your blog, I don't think. It's too cartoony or friendly or something. I am not saying that you are not cartoony or friendly…;) I am merely saying that I think it sits in contrast to your "Desire to inspire" font at the top, instead of complimenting it. It doesn't suit. So while boring, I think your other older font was more letting the writing and the photos shine, while this new sticky font is distracting me and drawing my eye more than it should.

however, it's not a BAD fond or an illegible one – again I'm just not sure it suits.

*** Also When I clicked "create Post", the next page says "This post has not yet been created … etc". The leading between the lines is all wrong – i.e. line 2 of type is crowding like 1, which makes it look bad and like it has a html mistake or something. Probably because the ascenders of the font are so tall.

So if you are going to use it, you'd better see if you can open up the leading on titles and things.

sue says:

Yes I like it, you have my vote.

Lindsey says:

No way Jose

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are indicated by *