Here we would like to clear up some widespread myths.

There isn't actually a universally “best” typeface for readability. Although there is much debate in professional circles about “better” or “worse” readability of typefaces, this often lacks a scientific basis in reality. There is also no real effort to investigate this thoroughly. The fact is that the differences in readability between the most common typefaces – and here we mean primarily the sans-serif ones – are actually minimal.

Rather, the question that should be at the forefront when choosing is: “Which typeface best suits the brand, the project, etc.?” The focus should be on finding typefaces that optimally reflect the character and personality of a brand. Those who focus solely on criteria like readability miss the chance to give a brand a distinctive profile. In our view, this is the essential core task of every design.

 

Take the “Geometrico” font family as an example. With its geometric forms and numerous circular elements, it appears technological and conveys a technical style that is ideally suited for the fields of technology and architecture. “Segno Brush”, on the other hand, offers the possibility of bringing playfulness and lightness to the text.

We believe that one should move away from the idea of a universally applicable typeface. This leads to missing out on many exciting possibilities.

 

For example, a combination of a headline font and another for body text offers significantly more flexibility. Sufficient contrast should be ensured. As long as the combination is easily distinguishable, anything is allowed: grotesque-serif, handwritten-grotesque, brush script-sans-serif, etc.

 

Try it out! Don't listen to the dusty, anti-future attitude of those so-called «gurus» for whom everything published after 1970 is bad anyway. Trust your intuition and have the courage to try new things.

There is the DIN font classification, which divides all fonts into 11 categories. However, this is outdated. Practically all commonly used fonts today fall into the category “6. Sans-serif Linear-Antiqua”.

 

It’s actually a shame, because there are many exciting fonts that look absolutely contemporary even within “5. Serif Linear-Antiqua”.

 

For example, “Geometrico Slab”, with its combination of strong serifs and perfect circles, appears very neutral, is very legible, and is excellently suited for longer texts as well. FSdesign's philosophy is more about breaking down the rigid categories of font classification and working between them, as with the “Sintesi” font family, which exists in various versions between sans-serif and serif.

Im Internet gibt es unzählige Angebote, von qualitativ hochwertig bis minderwertig.

 

Wir raten davon ab, kostenlose Schriften zu verwenden, da hier die Gefahr besteht, dass sie auch vom Dönerladen um die Ecke genutzt werden und somit dem Image einer Marke schaden. Setze lieber auf kommerzielle Angebote, die eine höhere Qualität versprechen. Probiere z.B. das Sortiment von FSdesign aus. Mit dem kostenlosen Schriftpaket haben Sie die Möglichkeit zu experimentieren und alles auszuprobieren.

There are countless offers on the internet, ranging from high quality to inferior.

 

The term «wall of text» is used disparagingly to describe a printed piece that consists of a homogeneous block of text. However, it is not necessarily the case that one must add image material or additional elements to avoid this. Even with means such as white space, asymmetry, contrast, and indeed the selection of a less conventional font – this can also only happen in certain areas such as titles or quotes – a “wall of text” can be avoided.