Nowadays, the first thing I check is the capability of the font: glyphs coverage, weights, styles, opentype necessities/niceties, etc.

There are many factor that I consider (or at least one of many). Most often, I need the typeface to be relevant to the subject of the text. For a book about the British Museum, I chose Caslon (an English typeface from about the time the Museum was founded), for a car magazine I went with an American typeface.

Other times, the capability of the typeface dictates the choice, as Riccard0 points out (weights, styles, etc).

Still on other projects I go more with the feel of a typeface. If it's for a 'quirky' brand/subject, I'll choose a 'quirky' typeface, one which I feel communicates the feel of the brand/subject. Of course, how it looks is a big factor.

Some typefaces were designed for specific purposes (signage, screen, etc) so that comes into play as well.

Those are the ones I can write down so far. If any others pop to mind, I'll write some more.

Hope this helps.

I have a printed list of my top 20 fonts (evenly split between serif and sans-serif) and I choose which one is most appropriate to the job. I came up with the list, based on tried and true workhorse fonts. Often, just the most popular choices available. I keep things as simple as possible, and as conservative as possible (which is demanded in the work I do.) A few simple questions leads me to the choice: Do I want lighter or darker? Old fashioned or modern? Compact or extended? My list covers the options. Only on special projects do I move away from the list and let myself have more fun in choosing a font. Sometimes I see a font I like and keep it in mind in case the right job comes along. I developed this strategy because the speed at which I need to get projects finished is incompatible with the speed at which I make choices. Also, my taste is not the same as the aesthetic of the work I do. So- I keep the choices to a minimum.

I think BeauW is absolutely right.

I worked in a large advertising company and all art directors, graphic designers and web artists have their 'bag-of-fonts'. Or their favorite, 'tried-and-true' selection of typefaces. Also, most agencies and companies have purchased a standard font library, in the past, and most have to work within that framework. When the occasional new job pitch or 'high priority' client comes along, or makes a special request, a requisition has to be submitted and approved before a new font family is added to the library. With all the different font licensing schemes around, companies tend to shy away from purchasing additional fonts, simply, because of the added cost. An art director really has to make a good case for wanting the font.

In any event, I would advise your students to just look through many different 'high-end' magazines, over a period od time, and see what they like. Put together a list of fonts and start from there. With experience, I'm sure they will experiment and try different solutions.

Selecting an appropriate 'typeface' is just like selecting and appropriate outfit when you go out. The occasion dictates the choice.

I hope this helps.

It's like asking a contractor which power tool to use given that there are so many on the market.

Part of it is context...the right tool for the particular job. A nice serif text face is likely the right tool to set a novel's copy in and a grungy block face is more likely useful in the context of a music magazine headline.

And then there's preference. Some folks like x on this font and y on this font because, well, they just do.

And like a good contractor, the key is to not have TOO many typefaces otherwise you end up with a mess and you spend more time finding the tool than using it.

@cjm_drw: Research for who and to what end?

@ Christopher Dean: It is research for an MA with a view to being a pedagogic methodology. I teach at Further Education level, but I don't want this to influence anyone

@ everyone who has contributed so far: many thanks

I am not around for the rest of the weekend, so don't think ill of me if I don't respond to any questions you have, I will check in on Sunday evening GMT

And thanks again

Where are you studying?

...there are too many ... faced with the dilemma of choosing an appropriate typeface

A dilemma involves two options.
Although a significant percentage of people follow the sloppy understanding that it means many options, there are enough hardliners (like myself) to warrant the strict usage.

I favour the "historical allusion" method (a term first used by DB Updike), whereby the historical style of a layout should match the historical era in which a typeface was designed. Also, if the content is historical, the layout and typeface should allude to the appropriate era.

I think I consider a host of characteristics for a potential typeface: Technical requirements (suitability for the medium, number of weights and widths, OpenType features), historical connotations or denotations (per Nick), temperament (when it can be divined), ability to pair with other typefaces used, and comments I've heard about it -- many times from this forum. But the decision as to which criterion to use tends to be spontaneous and unpredictable. On most occasions, something about the project's brief or the past design will trigger a thought of a genre or particular typeface. The key is to have a broad enough knowledge of the type world to connect the brief to a typeface.

As I've learned about and used more typefaces, I've also realized that, many times, there are numerous good options. While my tendency is to look through the online offerings of foundry after foundry, I've learned that eight or nine times out of ten, my first instinct ends up being what I stick with.

For example, a magazine I'm working on now differentiates itself from others by publishing fiction and poetry in addition to reportage. This led me to the idea of a suite, with a paired serif and sans. I had seen FF Yoga, as promoted by Fontshop, and that was my first thought. I looked through a bunch of other super-families (helped in part by Fontshop's FontLists), but Yoga still seemed to fit the magazine best, as a bit literary but appropriately unusual. In the time since that initial decision, I've realized that fiction and poetry are not equal partners with reportage, but the choice still seems sound. As the direction has shifted to become more of a take-off on book design, I've now gone looking for a contrasty Garamond for accents. I need a face in the Garamond genre to cement the literary quality, and it has to be rather sharp and fine to contrast enough with the bluntness of Yoga.

Also, Michael Bierut's "Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Typeface" is a useful summary of the characteristics one can use to choose type.

Well, whatever you choose should solve it's task. Something that is supposed to work as body copy on screen have other requirements than in a magazine, a book or on a newspaper page although few would recognize the difference looking at blown up samples.

More than often I find myself drawing the fonts I need.

Chris,

Most of the above comments I agree with. Yet, I am surprised that so many people have written so much without explicitly mentioning quality: for 95% or more of the things I do, I'm only interested in typefaces that meet a minimum bar for quality. That includes outline construction, spacing, kerning, consistency, and sometimes hinting.

I expect many folks will say "of course, that goes without saying," but I suspect you want even these implicit factors made explicit....

See also a blog post I wrote almost five years ago, which still seems equally relevant:
http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2005/12/quality_in_type.html

Cheers,

T

Glyph coverage is really important for what I do. If I am working on a book that requires all sorts of obscure phonetics characters then my choices are pretty limited. The same applies for mathematics. Also there’s the question of whether what I’m doing will be used mostly on screen or in print, which strongly influences the fonts I use.

I start with two assumptions: (1) not every character/feature I'll need will be in the font, and (2) some of the kerning-spacing in the font won't be to our taste. That means permission for us (the end user) to modify the font is important, either explicitly in the EULA, or by having an arrangement with the designer/seller.

I should note that "not every character" can mean something as simple as an extra lower-case "f" with a different terminal or right sidebearing (or both), so it can be controlled at the word boundry. Little details in the font can save hours of time with composition of a text, and of course, improve the appearance. "Type" has become complex enough that workflow issues are a factor.

This is in addition to other things noted above, of course.

* * *

Rich Hendel's On Book Design spends some time on factors designers consider when selecting typefaces.

@ Christopher Dean: I am studying and teach at London College of Communication where I have already had some interesting and, often, entertaining feedback for this subject. I have posted here to hopefully get a broader and worldwide response - contrary to the beliefs held by many an LCC academic (I include myself here too), there is life outside LCC...

Many thanks to all who have contributed so far

What do we think of the semiotic, semantic and rhetorical influences that we attribute to typefaces... how this adds to or interferes with our typeface choices?

What do we think of the semiotic, semantic and rhetorical influences that we attribute to typefaces... how this adds to or interferes with our typeface choices?

Chris, could you elaborate on this? It's an interesting question, but I'm not quite sure what kind of answers you're looking for.

...the semiotic, semantic and rhetorical influences that we attribute to typefaces.

I'm glad you said "influences" and "attribute".
Many people consider letter forms have inherent cultural qualities.
The request at Typophile is often for such things as a "friendly yet authoritative" face, or a "feminine" script.

Two good reads:

Ehses, H. (1976). Design Papers 1. Semiotic Foundation of Typography. NSCAD University. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Ehses, H., Lupton, E. (1988). Design papers 5. Rhetorical handbook: an illustrated manual for graphic designers. NSCAD University. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

I feel that Subject and purpose of the design is the most important and one should choose the typeface accordingly. A graphic designer should have its own list of best typefaces as many of us believe that.

But sometimes all graphic designers and art directors will land up with same typefaces to use in particular designs, so in the overcrowded design world you can experiment with typefaces.

I also realized that choosing a typeface for advertising design is very much different from graphic design.

@ auricfuzz:
Semantic: in what ways a typeface represents the link between the spoken (linguistic) and the physical (visual) meaning of words – how it visually ‘speaks’ to its reader?
Semiotic: what significance does a typeface have when portraying a message to an audience and how it visually achieve this? (type honoring its content, type as signifier, type as image)
Rhetorical: can the look of a typeface affect, persuade, influence etc. the way a viewer interacts with a piece of design?

This is going off-piste a little, but still very relevant

@ Christopher Dean: Thanks I've managed to find Design Papers 5 (as you say; a good read), but not 1 - any ideas where I may find this please?

@kamleshjangrid: why would you say 'choosing a typeface for advertising design is very much different from graphic design.' Surely the same decision making process applies to both?

...the semiotic, semantic and rhetorical influences that we attribute to typefaces.

You're focusing on the wrong user in your definitions.
It is to the professional user -- art directors, graphic designers and typographers -- that types have most meaning.

For readers, it is the finished document that signifies. The tools with which it is constructed mean very little.

It's difficult to draw analogies between type and other areas of design.
Is a typeface a tool, a material, or an ingredient?

Fundamentally, the signification of a typeface is determined by the typographer, in varying the typographic parameters of size, style (U&lc, all caps, italic, etc), weight, leading, line length, spacing, alignment, colour, and rotation. Textual content and juxtaposition with pictures further alter the meaning of a typeface, as does the output medium (print, pixels, posters, etc).

This is not to deny that there may be some small cultural quality of a typeface which the lay reader responds to in a direct manner, but its importance is generally overblown.

I contacted the NSCAD University Art Supply Store, +1 902 494 8176, they have four copies left and will ship internationally (with a credit card I believe).

Dartboard. Blindfold. :)

Using a dartboard just puts the question back one step. How do you select what fonts are on the dartboard?

1) I start with an analysis of requirements (non latin yes/no, special characters or symbols yes/no, one family / more families, number of weights, typographic features yes/no, oldstyle / lining / tabular figures etc.)

2) Then I try to find a general type style(s) matching with my design concept. I use a 2D "space": the horizontal axe describes the fonts from hand made (left) to geometric (right), the vertical axe is for extravagant fonts (top) and boring "invisible" typefaces (bottom). This chart helps me think what I really need for a particular project.

3) The third step is to make a list of type families in the desired category matching with my technical requirements. I use my memory, MyFonts, printed catalogs and friends.

4) Now I try to limit the long list to a couple of finalists. I consider the aesthetic values, consistency of letter shapes, quality of kerning, diacritical marks, overall color of the typeface, how the italic and bold work in the text, the economical aspect (sometimes I have to save paper, sometimes I am asked to make to book as thick as possible), price of a font.

5) I usually end up with two or three favorites. I try to test them, I print samples. When working on a large projects (newspaper, magazine), real offset printing tests are necessary. In the case I don't have selected fonts, I contact type foundries asking for a temporary licence; if they don't offer this kind of service, I asked them to open my InDesign file, change to default font to requested font and send back as PDF. If they won't provide it, they are out of the game.

I asked them to open my InDesign file, change to default font to requested font and send back as PDF. If they won't provide it, they are out of the game.

We do this upon request all the time. We also offer temp licenses, but most times this font swap and pdf is the fastest way to provide service.

James

>What are the factors you consider when choosing a typeface?

First, the name must end in an "A".

Second, it must not exist.

Third, no one can be working on it.

Cheers!

Thanks for those who have contributed so far, (however existential).

@ Nick Shinn: I fundamentally agree with your analysis of how much a typeface doesn't matter to the non-typographer, but I believe a reader accesses and recognises the differences in type-forms more than we think. Cognition of typefaces recently played a significant role in a couple of ad campaigns on the London Underground, without the lay person recognising the typefaces used the ads would have failed. Also in a conversation with the designer of the Daily Telegraph I was told the biggest complaint from their readership about a proposed re-design was the choice of typefaces to used. But I'm drifting off into 'should type be invisible' and 'clothes that words wear' territory... which are also factors

@ Christopher Dean: Thanks for the info

Cognition of typefaces recently played a significant role in a couple of ad campaigns on the London Underground...

Please describe further.

re "Cognition…" a reference would be great.

By cognition I mean the ability to draw upon inherited knowledge; without knowing the typefaces used by the companies the ads are parodying the 'reader' would not understand the significance that the typeface is inferring.
In the Dixon ads the typefaces for John Lewis and Selfridges are used for maximum effect. Likewise the Tubeorfalse campaign is relying on a visual awareness of the London Underground typestyle, but to a lesser extent because the fabric the slogans are made from also denotes the seating fabric and patterns used on different tube trains

http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2009/september/dixons

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/corporate/modesoftransport/tube/history/