graphic design, art, typography and architecture

Most will be aware of some unwritten rules about the number of fonts/typefaces one should use when designing. I seem to recall (and I may well have dreamt it), that one should not use more than three fonts on a single page. Now, perhaps that is too restrictive, but here’s what happens when you attempt to use half the fonts in the known universe on a single page:

It’s easy to see how the page loses any fluidity; rather than modular sections that click together, we’re faced with what the Cartoonist Daryl Cagle describes as a ransom note (Cagle’s own web site is an even worse example of mismanaged type). Cagle is wrong in his count. I’m not able to determine the exact number used, but it’s nowhere near 20, so I recant on my “half the fonts in the known universe” hyperbole. Many of the “fonts” that Cagle counts are in fact condensed, capitalised versions of fonts used elsewhere within the layout. Quentin Lueninghoener writes a very balanced crtitique of Cagle’s attack, though he’s no apologist for the LA Times (found through a link of the News Designer blog - very informative and nicely written). Although the redesigned LA Times doesn’t quite look like (as Cagle might imply) the aftermath of an explosion at a font factory, it does look somewhat awkward and poorly balanced. We can argue about semantics, about fonts and font families, etc, but the end result looks the same. I also think that Lueninghoener’s - perhaps tongue-in-cheek - ad hominem attack on Cagle and on Cagle’s web site brings nothing to the argument but a smile. Lueninghoener sums up thus:

To me, the point made in the post is actually a valid one. There’s a lot going on typographically on that cover. But 22 fonts? Hardly. Save the flag, there are only six typeface families used (maybe even five). And much as cartoonists will select a key word or two to darken or underline for emphasis in their panels, the designer has to put emphasis on certain words and labels. But instead of a toon panel with 50 words in it, they’re dealing with entire broadsheet pages with thousands of words and images.

But the point remains correct. When you’re dealing with that much information, noise and clutter can be the death of strong news judgment and hierarchy.

And perhaps it’s a little unfair to judge the redesign by a single cover. I’ve since seen several covers and my attitude has softened a little. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the redesign is bad, but it could have been much better. Could I have done better? No. My favourite newspaper design is that of the Wall Street Journal - it is tightly packed, but the layout is fluid, and we’re clear about where one thing ends and another element begins. Instead of using a multitude of fonts, the designers have used a limited palette; and then for further variations/emphasis, etc, they’ve employed not another font but a bold or italicised version. Type used in this way reinforces corporate identity. There’s no mistaking that this is The Wall Street Journal.

So what is good typography? Well, it’s obviously about more than employing a limited palette of fonts. I think the answer lies in existing good design - look at a newspaper or magazine - is it pleasing to the eye? Is it easy to differentiate page elements? Though not the best newspaper design in the world, The Japan Times is a good example of where a limited fonts palette makes for a clean and easily legible page. A serif font is used throughout; the logo font is also used for the main copy, heading and sub-headings with variations in size and weight. In the left contents summary column, the same font is employed, but a san-serif font is used for the headlines in that section; the same san-serif font is used for captions elsewhere. Basically, there are 3 fonts used, and this makes for easy reading; and I believe that that should be the principle objective: a newspaper is designed to be read; it’s an information resource. We’re not looking for art or eye-candy; we just want the news; we wish to be informed of the headlines, in some kind of hierarchy, and we want a taste of what’s beyond the front page.

There are plenty of good examples out there of the good use of typography in print and on-line. I’d welcome your comments - dissenting or otherwise, so feel free to click that little “comments” link and get typing - use as many fonts as you like, so long as it’s “Trebuchet MS”;)