Ugly fonts....which ones do you hate?

[Melchior]

I'll start with Melior and Garamond. Not to mention, Helvetica (and most sans-serif faces).

[George Thomas]

That's a subjective topic. I guess I must, deep down, intensely dislike some fonts because when I see them used in some situations my blood pressure goes up, but there are any number that I do like which I've seen other people say they hate. So, like politics and religion, it's better to not talk about it. Beauty, as well as utility, is in the eye of the beholder.

[Melchior]

1 hour ago, George Thomas said:

That's a subjective topic. I guess I must, deep down, intensely dislike some fonts because when I see them used in some situations my blood pressure goes up, but there are any number that I do like which I've seen other people say they hate. So, like politics and religion, it's better to not talk about it. Beauty, as well as utility, is in the eye of the beholder.

Any time I see Egyptian or or slab serif fonts being used, I know I am being lied to.

[rampageraptor]

Can't say I hate any particular typefaces—including those which are popular to hate on (Helvetica, Comic Sans, &c.—but instead focus on questionable uses of them.

I will say, though, I have a particular affinity for certain fonts (slab serifs rank highly among them) and rarely use others (Helvetica, Proxima Nova/Gotham/Kessel), preferring instead to select a less–ubiquitous face. So strictly speaking, I don't really like Helvetica, I just prefer what I think are better/less represented sans serifs.

Quote

So, like politics and religion, it's better not to talk about it. Beauty, as well as utility, is in the eye of the beholder.

I've learned to appreciate the 'heart' in what a lot of people consider 'bad design.'

[Melchior]

Well, some fonts just look so dated (modernist stuff from the 30s, and Melior from the 60s). Aldus has aged rather well, as has Trajanus. Sans-serif typefaces should never be used for books (except at large sizes in art-books or anything along those lines). Zapf made some very bad fonts, but Aldus is one of the all-time greats!

[rampageraptor]

Indeed, Aldus is one of those timeless designs, but I find its proportions to be a little dated and too conservative (I tend to prefer serif fonts with larger x-heights than Garamonds). I agree a lot of modernist stuff tends to look dated as well, but I would caution against disqualifying such designs wholesale. Optima (1958) is a good one, being designed for the display and paragraph contexts. Akzidenz Grotesk is old (1898) but has enough quirks compared to today's sans faces that I often use it where others might use Helvetica simply because I think it's more interesting. I also see it used frequently at text size in books with success.

[Melchior]

I'm not sure what you are describing by 'its proportions to be a little dated and too conservative'. I prefer smaller x-heights (I am reading a book right now set in some horrid Garamond that is too light, and whose x-height is too great). Try to get hold of Aldus BQ, not Aldus Roman (Linotype).

The Aldus Nova released about 10 years ago is a disaster. It hardly differs from Palatino Nova at all! See attached comparison between Aldus BQ (Berthold) and Aldus Roman (Linotype).

 

 

Aldus Comparison.pdf

[rampageraptor]

By dated and conservative, I refer to the low x-heights and slanted axis characteristic of old-style typeface designs. Compare to transitional and many contemporary serif faces, whose x-heights tend to be larger than old-style, and the axis is more likely vertical than slanted. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Aldus is a bad or unattractive typeface, just a matter of personal preference.

Quote

It hardly differs from Palatino Nova at all!

My understanding is that Aldus was designed not to be so different from Palatino, only to compliment it as Zapf felt the latter was a display font and the former worked better as a "workhorse" text font.

[Melchior]

I am not sure I made myself clear here: I am talking about Aldus Nova and Palatino Nova, from about 10 years ago. The attached file shows the original Palatino (1949), original Aldus (1953?), and Aldus Nova (2007). The proportions of original Palatino and Aldus are very similar, with two exceptions: the capitals vary in width more in Palatino (M is very wide, while E is narrow) than in Aldus, and the letters show less contrast.

Aldus-Palatino Comparison.pdf

[Przemysław Sakrajda]

I don't like Helvetica – it's overused and it's very plain without charcter.  Unfortunately, it's in the branding of the place I work for, so maybe I just got my dislike from looking at it every day for 8 hours. 😉 

I don't like slab serifs in general, they are somehow unbalanced and stocky for my eyes.

Overall I tend to use serif fonts with small x-height, or if I need to, I look for geometric sans-serifs. In my own works I use Jannon Serif & Sans from Storm Type - very flexible and they both match and also support Cyrillic and Greek.  For posters I look for decorative fonts with funky ligatures such as from glukfonts.pl. I love unconventional ligatures.

There's always room to use typefaces that I may not like, but they fit the purpose, for example creating a poster for museum that has exhibition regarding 1950's, I would pick something from that period. I think most designers do that.

[Chris Lozos]

"Dated" is a forever moving target. I prefer "Suits the subject and circumstance".

[Ignacio]

Mistral, I simply can’t stand it, have seen it a lot in Spain for years and years just because it came “with the computer”. Ah, and the best thing of it was when it was freely spacing, which happened a lot… nightmares. And I know it is not an ugly face, but…

[Riccardo Sartori]

3 hours ago, Ignacio said:

And I know it is not an ugly face, but…

Mistral is arguably one of the typefaces that most suffered the transition from metal to digital.

Source: http://www.roger-excoffon.com/portfolio/caractere-typographique-mistral/