one reason not to use Futura: Because almost every architect out there uses Futura. It's nice, but I never use that type when designing for an architect.
one that i like that i haven't heard anyone else mention is frutiger neue. Super-legible sans-serif font that is a little less ubiquitous and more organic than helvetica and univers
Gill Sans - nice and clean, inspired by the London Underground typeface.
I agree that if you want that dense phone book feel, Bell is the way to go. Also second Frutiger as an alternative to Helvetica and Palatino for serif.
I wear black all the time, but have only used Helvetica once. That may be because I work in the built environment though: those flat cutoffs make for really closed counters, which severely decreases legibility. Conversely, I like Frutiger a lot for signage, but never use it for print.
I'm going to go look up Bell now to remind myself of its admirable qualities. I've been using Scala for all my super-small work, but it would be nice to expand that palette.
Going to apply for one of those hippie enviro-type firms?
Definitely go sprang eco sans, and make sure at least one title font is large enough to see the little holes (about 16 pt). Don't worry, it prints MUCH better than it looks on screen.
a lot of people here said century gothic ... which i generally like except for that the "a" looks wayyyy too much like an "o" and is bound to throw people off here and there
sans serif fonts are generally nice
i find arial/helvetica (basically the same thing for anyone concerned) pretty boring tbh
ON A SIDE NOTE, a lot of you have mentioned fonts that one seems to need to purchase in order to use. maybe i just haven't searched hard enough, but can someone find a supplier that is offering such fonts for free? i'm not sure why someone in their right mind would pay $20+ for a font, unless it came with some software that architects generally use or something. cheers and gnight, don't fight, have a bite
i'm having a typeface/font dilemma... i'm currently working on my dissertation proposal and i'm trying to decide on a way of laying it out that looks good but is still easily readable... right now the different pieces are:
title: helvetica neue italic @ 18 (all lowercase)
subtitle: helvetica neue light italic @ 12 (all lowercase)
epigrams: helvetica neue light italic @ 10 (and right justified)
section headings: helvetica neue bold italic @ 12
main text body: helvetica neue regular @ 10 (currently left justified, but might switch to fully justified)
here's my dilemma... i really like the way that this looks right now... and i'm OK with using a sans-serif font for the body of the text on a document that isn't too long... but i think that i really need to use a serif font for my actual dissertation since reading an 80-100K word document in helvetica neue might be brutal...
any suggestions for a sexy serif font that will look good with helvetica neue titles and section headings?
everyone seems to be in agreement that they hate city blueprint. even the slightest letter in someone's portfolio, i'll reject it and toss it in the trash.
I think it's because people find them interesting, and when you haven't learned much about type yet "interesting" needs to occur on a large scale for you to notice it. The things that graphic professionals notice and get excited about are just too small for someone new to the world of type to really notice.
The subtitles in Avatar were Papyrus or something very similar. Drove me crazy. I thought the only people who still used that font were people from your local arts & crafts fair for their business cards.
I don't really know what's not hot other than the obvious godawful typefaces since I'm no typographer, but I know what I like! For my 2010 M.Arch portfolio I used:
-Gotham - for titles
-Hoefler Roman - for content
-Compacta - A little bit just for page numbering.
Portfolio Fonts 2009: HOT or NOT
If I want to be attractive and subtle :
Calibri
If I want to be important and cocky :
Univers
If I want to be respectful :
Bodoni
Each font has it's own personality, of course.
one reason not to use Futura: Because almost every architect out there uses Futura. It's nice, but I never use that type when designing for an architect.
i hear ya e, but fuck it's elegant.
got no problem with Futura just in the context of architects.
e's so much more generous than I am. :) Maybe I've just been Futura'd-out or something.
Gotham makes everything pretty. I love it and (over)use it all the time. Gotham rounded is also nice (for a change).
rationalist... can you find this font? We could make it the new comic sans
I've been using Serifa, love it...
link
...works very well with 75 black headers and 45 light text
(at the start of the portfolio, I was dead set on using a sans serif font, and look what I ended up with)
curious to hear thoughts from those more versed in typography and graphic design
Swis 721 LtCn Bt!!
that is my go to. i also like helvetica neue. i hate how this one girl ruined century gothic for me... long story.
Akzidenz everytime!!! its little idosyncracies (spelling?) really do it for me.
Also, Garamound Premier Pro,
On the Not list,
Century gothic - in my experience it is used by non-designers to seem designy, no offence.
one that i like that i haven't heard anyone else mention is frutiger neue. Super-legible sans-serif font that is a little less ubiquitous and more organic than helvetica and univers
bell is my favorite.
it's phonebook funky fresh and mildly institutional.
May get flamed for it, but I've liked this font recently:
Woah, woah, woah.
I had no idea helvetica was so... looked down on. I use it religiously.
But then again, I love most sans serif fonts.
Avenir - I've liked this recently.
Palatino and Requiem for serif fonts.
Personally, I never cared much for Helvetica.
Gill Sans - nice and clean, inspired by the London Underground typeface.
I agree that if you want that dense phone book feel, Bell is the way to go. Also second Frutiger as an alternative to Helvetica and Palatino for serif.
Using Helvetica is like wearing black
Hmm, maybe that explains it...I never wear black, more of a gray and blue kinda guy
I wear black all the time, but have only used Helvetica once. That may be because I work in the built environment though: those flat cutoffs make for really closed counters, which severely decreases legibility. Conversely, I like Frutiger a lot for signage, but never use it for print.
I'm going to go look up Bell now to remind myself of its admirable qualities. I've been using Scala for all my super-small work, but it would be nice to expand that palette.
May the force be with you:
Going to apply for one of those hippie enviro-type firms?
Definitely go sprang eco sans, and make sure at least one title font is large enough to see the little holes (about 16 pt). Don't worry, it prints MUCH better than it looks on screen.
I suppose offices that use ecofont, are the ones that put wind-turbines or solar panels on the roof to make "green" architecture.
I wear nothing but black and white... and the occasional grey. Guess that explains why I love helvetica haha.
The ecofont reminds me of... flashing vegas lights. I would've expected trees to be sprouting from each letter.
of late, i like whitney. it works pretty well for headlines and body copy.
A stamp set, eh? When I was in school I made a couple of labor-intensive hand-crafted one-off portfolios to show my creativity. Man, was that stupid.
i did that too, lookout. i was so pressured by the idea of a first portfolio. i feel like a moron for that now.
A stamp set, eh? When I was in school I made a couple of labor-intensive hand-crafted one-off portfolios to show my creativity. Man, was that stupid.
i did that too, lookout. i was so pressured by the idea of a first portfolio. i feel like a moron for that now.
a lot of people here said century gothic ... which i generally like except for that the "a" looks wayyyy too much like an "o" and is bound to throw people off here and there
sans serif fonts are generally nice
i find arial/helvetica (basically the same thing for anyone concerned) pretty boring tbh
ON A SIDE NOTE, a lot of you have mentioned fonts that one seems to need to purchase in order to use. maybe i just haven't searched hard enough, but can someone find a supplier that is offering such fonts for free? i'm not sure why someone in their right mind would pay $20+ for a font, unless it came with some software that architects generally use or something. cheers and gnight, don't fight, have a bite
i guess pirating the fonts is out of question?
i sometimes pay several hundred for a font. guess my mind is not right.
I've paid hundreds for one font countless times as well. But I know my mind ain't right.
Arno Pro, makes I=the government
i'm having a typeface/font dilemma... i'm currently working on my dissertation proposal and i'm trying to decide on a way of laying it out that looks good but is still easily readable... right now the different pieces are:
title: helvetica neue italic @ 18 (all lowercase)
subtitle: helvetica neue light italic @ 12 (all lowercase)
epigrams: helvetica neue light italic @ 10 (and right justified)
section headings: helvetica neue bold italic @ 12
main text body: helvetica neue regular @ 10 (currently left justified, but might switch to fully justified)
here's my dilemma... i really like the way that this looks right now... and i'm OK with using a sans-serif font for the body of the text on a document that isn't too long... but i think that i really need to use a serif font for my actual dissertation since reading an 80-100K word document in helvetica neue might be brutal...
any suggestions for a sexy serif font that will look good with helvetica neue titles and section headings?
APhil, take a look-see at Typography for Lawyers, Font Recommendations.
For anyone who seriously wants to learn something about typography I would recommend "Stop Stealing Sheep". There are many, but this is a start.
http://www.amazon.com/Stop-Stealing-Sheep-Find-Works/dp/0201703394
Ban Comic Sans
everyone seems to be in agreement that they hate city blueprint. even the slightest letter in someone's portfolio, i'll reject it and toss it in the trash.
As a general rule I wouldn't use anything that was made to look like archi handwriting or lettering. You will brand yourself as a design 101 student.
^ I would expand that to include just about anything that was made to look like some kind of handwriting.
Yes, the handwriting or "blueprint" look should be thrown out immediately.
Unfortunately, like Papyrus, so many seem drawn to them initially.
I think it's because people find them interesting, and when you haven't learned much about type yet "interesting" needs to occur on a large scale for you to notice it. The things that graphic professionals notice and get excited about are just too small for someone new to the world of type to really notice.
The subtitles in Avatar were Papyrus or something very similar. Drove me crazy. I thought the only people who still used that font were people from your local arts & crafts fair for their business cards.
yeah, just saw it last night, couldn't believe such a high end digital production could use such a bad font.
I am guessing that someone got hell for it, fired and is now living in exile
I don't really know what's not hot other than the obvious godawful typefaces since I'm no typographer, but I know what I like! For my 2010 M.Arch portfolio I used:
-Gotham - for titles
-Hoefler Roman - for content
-Compacta - A little bit just for page numbering.
Two I like and don't see mentioned here:
Thonburi
Skia
Both have a character that goes a little beyond Helvetica.
Comic Sans must die and then we must use it's dead body to pound Papyrus into a bloody pulp.
I know it falls in the category of "novelty" but I do like PunchLabel
These fonts can maybe seem a bit dated, but in certain contexts I think they work. And they are architectural.
www.houseind.com/fonts/neutraface
Scott M B Gustafson
maison-orion.com
check out the helvetica detector.. scroll down.
http://tokyoblues.squarespace.com/
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.