[LINK] Environmental impact of web versus print

[Darrell Burkey]

On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 08:19, Ivan Trundle wrote:
> On 27/09/2006, at 8:01 AM, rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au wrote:
> 
> > And there are basic design issues as well. It's almost impossible  
> > to get <stereotype> computer geeks </stereotype> to understand  
> > this, but typography matters - hugely. Sans-serif fonts reduce  
> > readability.
> 
> Old research. You'll note that contemporary studies on this subject  
> are split on this point. YOUNG readers prefer sans-serif, old readers  

Yes, typography is old research. True and tried. I'm no expert on the
topic (although I am in a related field) but one reason I loathe web
publishing is how poorly text is formated. Serif fonts are used for a
reason. I was taught that we read in "chunks" and the serifs lead your
eyes smoothly along. Although design guidelines are flexible (if there
is a reason) one of the most basic of guidelines is 'non-serifs for
headlines and serifs for body type'. 

Another thing I haven't seen mentioned here that bothers me a great deal
is that both CRT and LCD monitors are transmitted light (backlit for
lack of a scientific term). When you read off of paper the light
illuminationg the text is reflected and bounced back to the eye which
has a much more compressed contrast range. There is a huge difference
and I find my eyes sensitive to viewing a monitor for too long. Most
monitors are typically turned up far too high in brightness/contrast
causing the fonts to bleed and the large areas of white space tend to
bother me as well. 

Web publishers have a lot to learn from typography and the print media.
But then again, these days anyone who owns a copy of Dreamweaver is
considered a professional web designer so what can we do? Running for
cover....


-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Darrell Burkey
UNIX Systems Administrator
College of Asia & the Pacific
Australian National University 
Ph: (02) 6125 4160