I read somewhere that a serif font such as Times Roman is easier to read than a sans serif font such as Arial. This is why most books are written in serif fonts.
Can anybody confirm that serif fonts have less eye fatigue than sans serif fonts?
BTW our specs are written in (sans serif) Lucida Sans Unicode 10 point.
It is well known that sans-serif fonts are much slower to read.
Everyone knows the saying “The serif will arrest you”.
Oooh
Dave,
I believe you, but can you prove it? I would like to present a case for changing spec fonts.
BTW WHAT IS REALLY HARD TO READ IS ALL CAPITAL LETTERS THAT ARE PRINTED ON DRAWINGS.
Well, I shot the serif and we use Arial 10 pt for the body of the text and 11 for headings, 12 for titles.
Dave:
Why should speed be an issue? We are writing instructions not a novel.
Check this article about fonts.
David and Dave,
No, its the serif won’t arrest you -grin!
Serif fonts are ‘sometimes’ easier to read. There are some serifs that are really exotic, or for large visual displays that are actually harder to read.
Times is not particularly easy to read unless the ledding between lines is increased. It was created for narrow columns and when you go to the font/typography specialists, it is recommended that Times never be on a line over 40 characters in length.
As a note, the font called New Century Schoolbook (sometimes Century Schoolbook or just Schoolbook) was created specifically for text books. That is the font that I use in my specs.
Alan’s reference is a good starting point on fonts.
William
Here is another one from Ireland. This actually has a few good tips there.
http://www.nala.ie/download/pdf/writing_design_tips.pdf
I did a google search using these words and came up with 12,000 entries. I am sure it can be narrowed down further.
easier to read font sans serif print
David:
I think your last reply (RE: CAPS) makes the point I was about to suggest, and that is it’s a matter of familiarity.
People learn to read by recognizing words they see in print. Most newspapers and books are printed in serif fonts. Therefore, recognition of serif fonts is quicker for most people because that is what they see most often.
I think serif fonts are little denser than sans serif. You get more words on a page. That may have something to do with print media leaning that way.
However, the media does make a difference. Road signs are designed to be read quickly, nearly always in sans serif. Once again, recognition in that media is best in the form that people are most familiar with. Could you imagine a highway sign in serif text?
The electronic world makes extensive use of sans serif fonts, such as Arial and Lucida. As people spend more time at the computer screen, they will gain comfort with those font styles and that could eventually overtake their preference for serif fonts.
As for our office, our marketing materials use Ottawa, but for all our correspondence and specs we use Times New Roman.
It seems to me, since you spend more time with your specs than anyone else, you should use what is comfortable for you. Print out a page of the same text in several fonts and sizes and see which looks “right” to you.
Anon,
Who said anything about speed? I am talking about fatigue.
I recently had LASIK eye surgery and my eyes get very tired reading all day.
BTW, speed is a good thing. The quicker a contractor or architect can find information the quicker they can get on to the task at hand.
David refers to the all capital letter notes on drawings … I agree. I assume this is just a carryover from the olden days when all handwriting on the drawings was in upper case. After all, isn’t that the way we all learned to print, architecturally speaking? With the prevalence of the use of computers now in putting together drawings, is there any reason to be using upper and lower case letters in the notes? I know that I would have a tough time getting those in the office to turn off their caps lock, but I’ve at times used lower case in the notes … for “and”, for “w/”, for “dia”, “x” (as in 2x4 rather than 2X4), etc. … to have the more important terms or numbers stand out better. I just feel it looks a little bit better on the sheet to do some minor sprinkling of lower case fonts.
BTW, we use Arial 10 pt for the body and headings, with bold fonts for the header/footer, the 3 parts headings, and for article headings.
Richard:
I like your road sign metaphor. What we want is to get people to read the specification more, so maybe we should take the advertising method and put sexy pictures or beer ads on the cover to get the contractors to, at least, open the project manual. Take a look at all those ads on the highway billboards. 
Said with a sense of humor.
I have another poll(?) to ask. Has anybody ever experimented with double columns? I have seen a set of specs done this way and found them easier to read. I did a test myself with a section and asked a few architects what they thought and they found it easier to read. I never went any further, but would like to hear any other opinions.
I too have experimented with double-column specs. I had hoped it would get more information on a page without a loss of legibility, by reclaiming some of the blank spaces found to the right of each heading, short sentence, and list entry. However, I found this space savings was almost equally offset by the loss of the center gutter space. At that point, it didn’t seem worth the extra effort to configure the dual columns.
I have also experimented with various fonts, including Times New Roman, Arial, and Century Schoolbook. I am now using Zapf Humanist, a sans-serif font which I find to be extremely legible and space-efficient at 11 point.
I experimented with a few formats several years ago, using various margins, line lengths, and fonts. The only one that generated unsolicited response was using two columns; several contractors and suppliers said they found it easier to use.
In 1998 I did some research on fonts and other page format characteristics, and submitted a summary report to CSI’s Technical Committee. It’s on line at www.northstarcsi.com/PageFormat.pdf
I have wanted to use a two-column format for some time, but never have; it would increase legibility and reading speed a lot more than a serif font, and that would be worth it, regardless of whether it saved space or not.
11 point Times was my first spec client’s standard, and it became my default–not 12 point (too big), not 10 (too small). Just right. Arial and Helvetica are substantially bulkier, size for size.
For beauty, my favorite is the well-named Optima, the perfect font, clean and timeless, but not traditional. Its thick and thin strokes give it the grace of a Roman, but without the serifs. (AIA documents used to be set in Optima, but aren’t, I regret, any more.)
The success of a two-column format depends to a great extent on the wrting style. If a terse, bulletin point style is used, two columns will put more information on a page, as the lines are generally short. If a more narrative style is used, with long sentences and paragraphs, little is gained.
A few changes in indents also helps. Rather than indent paragraphs from articles, setting both at the left margin works wonders. The difference in addressing (1.01 vs. A), plus use of bold for article titles, eliminates any possible confusion over subordination of content. Reducing indents from the default 0.5 inch also picks up space at no loss in readability.
One thing to remember when choosing fonts is that not everyone will have the same computer fonts and if you are sharing files, it may create a problem. (those little rectangles are the devil to decipher). Make sure that the font you choose is one that is universal (no pun intended).
I’ve never considered going to a two-column format for the following reason: It’s hard enough getting consultants to follow even the most basic formating requirements, such as:
-left, right, top, and bottom margins
-font size
-footers
We use Times New Roman 10 point for our specs. I’m just not too fond of Arial. Optima is a very nice font, and used it for a while at a firm that used it for everything. We also use non-justified paragraphs since justification can create some odd spacing with long names or items with non-breaking spaces. Two columns works better, in my opinion, only with much smaller fonts where the line length becomes excessive. As a Masterspec user, I have written a macro–which resides with some others on a special “Spec tools” spot on my menu bar–which nearly instantly re-formats Masterspec to my preferred style. It is easier to use, and more powerful than what’s provided in MasterWorks.