Graphics Reference
In-Depth Information
F
Michelle Pinkston
Iowa State University, United States
Combining Type Styles
The conventional wisdom for mixing typefaces is to select two
type families for a given job. As a basic bit of advice, this is a good start; it provides a
framework for finding a maximum amount of contrast, and it forces a designer to ex-
ercise some restraint. In one sense, this rule is predicated on the notion of establish-
ing clear hierarchy; the greater the variety of typefaces, it is reasoned, the more diffi-
cult it will be for a reader to categorize and remember the meanings of different treat-
ments among informational components. As with all typographic rules, of course, con-
text plays an important role in deciding whether or not to adhere to such a limitation.
The complexity of the information being presented is one variable; the overall neutral-
ity, consistency, and expressiveness are others to consider. If a job requires seven or
eight type-faces to communicate the appropriate message, so be it—but choose wisely.
Contrast among typefaces that are juxtaposed is critical. The only reason to change a
typeface is to gain an effect of contrast, and so the contrast achieved by the combina-
tion should be clearly recognizable. Otherwise, why bother? Opposing the extremes of
weight (light against bold), of width (regular against condensed or expanded), or style
(neutral sans serif against slab serif or script) is a natural starting point. But some-
where in the mix, even among extremes of this nature, some formal relationship must
exist between the selected fonts to enrich their visual dialogue. Choosing a sans serif
and a serif that are about the same weight or width, for example, creates a tension of
similarity and difference that can be quite sophisticated. Selecting two serif faces that
are similar in weight, but very different in width or contrast, achieves a similar tension.
Sometimes this choice is functional; for example, if the difference between the face se-
lected for text and its bold counterpart in the same family is not particularly pronounced
(meaning the use of the bold doesn't achieve the desired emphasis), a similarly shaped
bold style may be substituted. Recognizing the differences in the details among a se-
lection of faces from which to choose is an important step in making a choice for a
clear combination. Generally, avoid combing two faces of a similar style unless the dif-
ference is pronounced enough for the average reader to notice. Combining Caslon and
Baskerville, for example—two transitional serifs with similar axis, weight, width, and
terminal shapes—isn't such a great idea. But combining Bodoni—a modern serif of ex-
treme contrast—with Glypha—a slab serif of uniform stroke weight but similar width
and axis—might be effective. As another possibility, similar faces set at dramatically
different scales might be unified by the weight of their strokes at these different sizes.
For example, 7-point Futura Heavy capitals, which are very dot-like, might correspond
