This is due to hinting or the font's lack thereof. At small sizes most fonts will get wonky on screen. Only those with superior hinting will do well without specially designed bitmaps.

Stephen... man you know your typography.
(So, maybe you will give me some further "hints." ;-)

Any help as to a font to replace Myriad on a website that may have some flavoring would be very welcome.

Thanks
wnf

How large? I highly recommend sticking with HTML text for anything under 18pt. Lisboa will work just fine as a GIF at 18+.

This is good advice.

Trying to get typography to size properly across browsers and systems is a task even with great css.... hence, my try at a small gif or jpeg for 16pt type.

I think youve made a good point... thanks!

To help you I've put up two gif's of Lisboa in different sizes and with different anti-alias renderings:

Lisboa dark grey on white
Lisboa light grey on black

Peter, both links are pointing to the same image.

I'm impressed. 14pt. Crisp or Smooth in all weights is not bad at all. What method were you using to make the GIFs, wnf?

http://www.fontshop.com/fontfeed/archives/how_to_make_gif.cfm

Somebody said crisp small onscreen type?
http://www.themicrofoundry.com/manademo/

hhp

Yes, Mana is nice. Am I the only one distracted by the 'r'? How about an alternate at least, Hranter?

> Am I the only one distracted by the ‘r’?

No.
Am I the only one distracted by the ‘M’, 'O' and 'W'?

Everybody knows type people can't read anyway. ;-)

Seriously, it's hard to know whether given distractions on the part of "involved" people come from a good place. I'm not saying there are No Problems (I'm sure there are) but when Berlow claims the open-bottom bino "g" is a clown, and I'm sure it's not, what am I supposed to think?

Miguel, I know Stephen's problem with the "r" (and he's not alone) but I wonder exactly what distracts you in the "M", "O" and "W" (and in which sizes/weights)?

hhp

Miguel wrote: Peter, both links are pointing to the same image.

ah sorry:

Lisboa dark grey on white
Lisboa light grey on black

Stephen wrote: I’m impressed. 14pt. Crisp or Smooth in all weights is not bad at all. What method were you using to make the GIFs, wnf?

Just picking differentt anti-alais and the save for web - GIF 256 colors
You could go a bit lower on the colors.

Peter, 16 shades (per hue) is almost always enough.

hhp

Actually, Peter, I was asking wnf (the original poster) what his settings were since he found it unsatisfactory.

> Miguel, I know Stephen’s problem with the “r” (and he’s not alone) but I wonder exactly what distracts you in the “M”, “O” and “W” (and in which sizes/weights)?

In reverse order of (alphabetic) appearance, the Ugly, the Wide and the Widest :^)

Well, I'm not sure exactly what you're saying about which. I do realize the "M" is wide in every size/weight, but in a bitmap font it's not always possible to make symmetrical letters an ideal width, especially if you want to keep certainly corners sharp (one pixel). Also in bitmap fonts you have to mind the relationships of the various sizes, and you have to "snap" the glyphs in larger sizes to the wider possibility so you leave yourself enough room in the smaller sizes. You'll notice how some letters (like the "T") have quite different proportions across the sizes.

The sacrifices in a bitmap font can be strenuous and befuddling.
Look at the "v" in 16 PPEM Georgia!

hhp

Hi Stephen

I had to catch up to this runaway thread.

You typo folks are really outstanding... almost complete mastery of all things type oriented.
(I am learning a great deal... perhaps too much for my own good ;-)
Selecting and implimenting adventuresome/complimentary fonts can be time consuming.
Maddening. Yup, that too!

Anyway, for my proposed treatment of the Lisboa OSF... I was planning to just use it in a gif for subtitles and small heads as a gif from Imageready (256) standard.

Thx

wnf