Since the dawn of time, ah-hem, actually since the 18th century, there’s been a clash of preference around serif vs. sans serif letterforms. What’s up with the typeface tussle? Is there really a difference? Well, some people love serifs, some people hate them.

What are serifs? They are the small feet at the end of the strokes on a letter or symbol. Some typefaces are serifed, and others are unserifed, otherwise known as sans serif.

Which side do you fight for in the ultimate typeface choice for your needs? Well, that depends.

Rivalry for readability!

There’s been 100 years of research and argument on which style is more readable. This is the general thought in the typography community about serifs:

“Serifs are used to guide the horizontal “flow” of the eyes; The lack of serifs is said to contribute to a vertical stress in sans serifs, which is supposed to compete with the horizontal flow of reading.” [De Lange, R. W., Esterhuizen, H. L., Beatty, D. (1993), Electronic Publishing]

This has not been fully proven. There are a few factors in favor of serifs though, serifs have additional indication to their characters that sans serifs do not, thereby improving identification. And, readability also is increased if typeset well.

What the sans serif team has going for it, is the fact that sans serifs are much more easy to read when set small. Those pesky serifs tend to clog up negative spaces when scaled down. It’s been claimed that sans serifs are easier to read on screen.

I’m not sold on that, but I agree with that statement pre-2010 before hi-resolution and retina screens came into play on our devices. Those serifs used to crumble against the harsh light of the LCD monitor screen.

The tried-and-true application was always serif for reading copy, sans serif for emphasis.

Spar for medium!

Determining the final output of your piece will help you advance towards the best choice. Besides the differences in color spaces CMYK vs. RGB, the way we perceive light is totally different between paper and screen. Light reflects off paper to read, whereas on a screen, the surface is backlit (which can cause a degree of fatigue).

We used to assume that we could make any ol’ serif and sans serif fonts play nicely. But that was 10 years ago, but now we have to know if they were designed for print or for screen. Screen fonts don’t have print features like ink traps.

And same goes with the screen. Many digital versions of classic fonts have been re-engineered for the screen. Just make sure you source recent versions that work best with the software. Needing to set really small type? Choose Reading Edge fonts, which were developed for reading at small sizes on the screen.

If you’re going to press with your piece, think about how many printing plates you’re specifying, and what paper you’ll be printing on. This consideration will also affect the final output.

If you are printing on textured paper or reversing out your type, you’ll have to increase the type size or weight, or choose a typeface that can hold the ink. Consult with your print rep to make sure. If you’re planning on staring on the big screen (or small screen), consider these three things: how far from someone’s eyes your type will be seen, what the final screen resolution is and environment your design will be viewed.

Clash for context!

Read the content before you set it, and decide which works best to translate the tone.

Serif typefaces are the elder of the two styles; the first letterforms created were serifs, and sans serifs are relatively new on the scene (18th century). So, if you want to demonstrate a bit of history or authority, serifs are your weapon of choice.

If you’d like something more contemporary, choose a sans serif. Sans serifs are typically informal, and serifs formal, but from there, there’s no rules. Once you decide, start digging into your classifications to narrow it down and really make decisions based on the nuances of letterform anatomy.

So which one is the best?

As you see, there’s a bunch of qualities to consider just in the first step of choosing between serif and sans serif. There’s no one single answer. But no matter which you choose, a successful choice will be evidenced by the message understood first when reading, not the style of the font.

Once you make that choice, you’ll need to dive into classifications. We love the book The Anatomy of Type, A Graphic Guide to 100 Typefaces by Stephen Coles. The book demonstrates the characteristics between classifications to help you choose wisely.

Back in the phototypesetting years, there was hundreds of fonts to choose from. Nowadays, picking out a typeface is much more difficult as there are over 300,000 fonts available for direct download. Ay caramba.

Know what you’re designing and then you can make your choice more swiftly. In our online Type 1 Class, I provide an ESPN-highlight view of classifications, which I dive deeper into this topic. Do you typically prefer serif or sans serif fonts? Let us know on Twitter at @TypeEd.

---

Michael Stinson is a co-founder and instructor at TypeEd, where he helps designers implement better typography, efficiently. Get more typography in your inbox when you sign up for more updates about TypeEd.

I grew up with children’s books, and truly loved the stories. Every evening, a favorite book of mine renewed a spark of imagination before bedtime. Story time was the fun part of school while delivering life’s lessons and eventually encouraging me to read. Those books provide me the adventure I craved, allowed me to become a hero for a day and granted me permission to visit new worlds in my daydreams.

The books also gave me and my classmates our very first taste of typography and illustration. Those pictures welcomed us in, but it was the words which really hooked us and carried us away. Some books were easier to read, and some more difficult, depending on our age and reading ability. Word length, character size, and quantity of type versus white space on the page either created comfort or presented a challenge.

In the 70s, the time of my childhood, most of our classic children’s books were typeset in large typefaces from the classifications Humanist Serif (or Old Style) and Transitional Serif.

Both serif styles differ in calligraphic style and stroke contrast, but they were both used in children’s books for their similar legibility. These two classes were popular for book typesetting because they are easy to read, mainly attributed from the following five characteristics.

1. High x-height The x-height of a character refers to the visual size of the typestyle, not the point size. Compare the heights of the lowercase ‘x’ from a Humanist Serif to another typeface, and that will give you an idea of how ‘large’ and legible it is.

Both of these are Transitional Serifs, but Baskerville is easier to read than Mrs. Eaves, because of its high x-height.

2. Large counters Another indication of letterform size is in the size of the counters. Letters containing closed counters include A, B, D, O, P, Q, R, a, b, d, e, g, o, p, and q. Open counters have apertures (open “mouths”) and exist in the letters c, f, h, i, s and so on. When the counters are larger, they are easier to read.

3. Wide bracketed serifs Brackets are the curved connection between the stem and serif. Think of a wall being a stem and a shelf being a serif. A bracket is used under the shelf to hold it up. Wide serifs with brackets help the reader identify the letter.

4. Double-story allographs Allographs are considered variants of a letter. The lowercase versions of letter g and letter a have two types of variants. The one we learned how to write in grade school penmanship is single-story. The alternative is double-story. The double-story variants are easier to read because there’s more visual indicators in the letterform.

5. Moderate contrast in stroke variation due to calligraphic origins When there is some contrast and stroke distinction in the letterform, it aids in readability.

The overall layout of the text pages implies the reading level. Large format, type size, white space and illustrations will visually communicate that the book is for beginners. Smaller page size, smaller type size and dense copy with little or no visuals will appeal to older readers. When a child opens the book, they know if they can read it or not, before reading any of the words.

The book Corduroy by Don Freeman (1976) is about a bear who wanders around a department store after closing time. It was a favorite of mine when I was very young. Looking at the text page, the copy is set in a classic Humanist typeface called Palatino, which has a large x-height and wide counters. Only one or two sentences are set at a time, which indicates the book is for toddlers.

Early readers love Little Golden Books. I used to carry my 12-book box set around the house and would pull out the gold-spined volumes one-by-one. One of the originals, The Poky Little Puppy by Janette Sebring Lowrey (1942) is also set in a Humanist typeface, Garamond.

Charlotte’s Web by E.B. White (1952) is a book written for tween readers. The page is set in Caslon, which has been classified both as Humanist and Transitional Serif.

Pull out your old books and take a look inside. Most of the classics were set in serif. And more recent ones, depending on their concept, might be set in sans serif. Either way, they probably have large x-heights, wide characters, and two-story allographs to keep kids reading.

Which books did you love as a child? Did they have memorable typesetting? Please share your favorite books and tidbit ideas on Twitter, don’t forget to tag @TypeEd. I’d love to know what typography first influenced you as a young reader.

All book images are sourced courtesy of Google books and material copyrighted by their authors.

---

Rachel Elnar is the producer and co-founder at TypeEd, where she helps bring the craft of typography back to design education. Get more type in your inbox and sign up for more about TypeEd columns (and other announcements).