The Quizbowl Resource Center

Why is it that Times New Roman is the font of choice for packets? I find it difficult to read; rn looks quite similar to m, for example. Is it just me?

That is a common problem with TNR 10. An easy way to work around it is to increase the zoom level to 120%+.

SirT wrote:That is a common problem with TNR 10. An easy way to work around it is to increase the zoom level to 120%+.

Sure, but why use it, if it has such problems?

I've gotten less enamored of TNR 10 over the years; I've experimented with different fonts in the last couple of MOs as a result. I like things like Cambria or Palatino in slightly larger font sizes.

Apparently, in schools it is recommended that teachers use rounded, wide fonts so they're easier to see from farther away and TNR is not usually recommended. That is one of the main reasons as to why Comic Sans is commonly used even though most people dislike it. Arial, Helvetica, Cambria, and Georgia are all easier to read in my opinion, especially when they're smaller fonts. TNR is probably just used most frequently as it is the standard for writing essays and is the typical font used in guidelines for question length.

Palatino is a great font. I also nominate Century Schoolbook. Both of these are a bit larger than TNR and may prevent future myopia in moderators.

Perhaps one's font decision ought to depend whether the packet is being read from paper or a computer screen?

Kyle wrote:Perhaps one's font decision ought to depend whether the packet is being read from paper or a computer screen?

The only time a computer screen is an issue is if packets are .pdf, and Acrobat does have a zoom feature.

dtaylor4 wrote:

Kyle wrote:Perhaps one's font decision ought to depend whether the packet is being read from paper or a computer screen?

The only time a computer screen is an issue is if packets are .pdf, and Acrobat does have a zoom feature.

I meant because of the serifs.

I was taught that if you're creating something meant to be read on a screen, use a sans-serif typeface for the body.

I like Times New Roman if you turn the zoom up. I find that writing in "font size 10" is the ideal way to determine question length, but I don't like it (unless I turn the zoom up) for reading questions.

The rn/m problem was a contributing factor in one of my team's Geography Bowl losses, the reader said "tam" when he was supposed to say "tarn" and it completely threw me off.

When I read from a laptop, I change the font to Cambria. Not sure what is best for reading on paper. Theoretically you want serifs, so you still have to watch out for the rn/m problem.

Edward Cullen Bryant wrote:The rn/m problem was a contributing factor in one of my team's Geography Bowl losses, the reader said "tam" when he was supposed to say "tarn" and it completely threw me off.

When I read from a laptop, I change the font to Cambria. Not sure what is best for reading on paper. Theoretically you want serifs, so you still have to watch out for the rn/m problem.

I just did the rn/m test. Mostly because most of Twitter got trolled the other day by "Adarn Shefter" convinced ESPN and the rest of the world that Tim Tebow had been traded to the Jaguars (Adam Shefter is ESPN's top NFL reporter).

I'd rank them based on that issue alone for ease to read:

1) Comic Sans (i'm not joking, it's actually the easiest to tell apart)
2) Lucida Sans
3) Cambria
4) Calibri

And then the fonts that absolutely stink for this
5) Verdana
6) Arial
7) TNR

Broad-tailed Grassbird wrote:

Edward Cullen Bryant wrote:The rn/m problem was a contributing factor in one of my team's Geography Bowl losses, the reader said "tam" when he was supposed to say "tarn" and it completely threw me off.

When I read from a laptop, I change the font to Cambria. Not sure what is best for reading on paper. Theoretically you want serifs, so you still have to watch out for the rn/m problem.

I just did the rn/m test. Mostly because most of Twitter got trolled the other day by "Adarn Shefter" convinced ESPN and the rest of the world that Tim Tebow had been traded to the Jaguars (Adam Shefter is ESPN's top NFL reporter).

I'd rank them based on that issue alone for ease to read:

1) Comic Sans (i'm not joking, it's actually the easiest to tell apart)
2) Lucida Sans
3) Cambria
4) Calibri

And then the fonts that absolutely stink for this
5) Verdana
6) Arial
7) TNR

I saw the Adarn Schefter tweets, classic prankster. Tight keming makes everything look dean and modem.

As for Comic Sans, if I ever see a set typeset in Comic Sans, I will END the editor responsible.

TNR 10 seems to be the set standard for submission just so we know how long a tossup and that a "six-line tossup" means the same thing to everybody. But I think when it comes to reading, TNR 10 is a bad idea.

I find magnifying TNR 10 to 120% is the most aesthetically appealing presentation of a packet known to man.

I can't believe I missed a discussion on fonts, so I figured I'd add my opinion(s) even if I am a bit late to the discussion. Palatino is a good font, but it does have a slight rn vs. m problem. Gill Sans is a nice, readable sans-serif that I prefer to Helvetica because it's just a bit rounder (although Helvetica is also a good font, which I think most people agree on). Cochin is very easy to tell rn vs. m apart, but beyond that doesn't have much going for it because it's so small and needs to be at least 12 pt to be readable on-screen.

Have people considered just kerning their favorite font to space out rn and any other problem letters? This could even be done in TNR and wouldn't alter the font so much that it would change the number of lines of a tossup (unless people would rather just track the whole font, which would have to be done afterwards since it'd impact the length of the tossups).