Best Practices of Combining Typefaces
Creating great typeface combinations is an art, not a science. Indeed, the beauty of typography has no borders. While there are no absolute rules to follow, it is crucial that you understand and apply some best practices when combining fonts in a design. When used with diligence and attention, these principles will always yield suitable results. Today we will take a close look at some the best practices for combining typefaces — as well as some blunders to avoid.
Combine a Sans Serif with a Serif
By far the most popular principle for creating typeface combinations is to pair a sans serif header typeface with a serif body typeface. This is a classic combination, and it’s almost impossible to get wrong.
In the example below — a typical article layout — we have Trade Gothic Bold No.2 paired with Bell Gothic on the left side. They are both sans serif typefaces. However, they have very different personalities. A good rule of thumb, when it comes to header and body copy design problems, is not to create undue attention to the personality of each font. Trade Gothic is arguably a no-nonsense typeface. Bell Gothic, on the other hand, is much more dynamic and outspoken.

Putting these two together creates an unwanted conflict in the design. Trade Gothic wants to get to the facts, but Bell Gothic wants to have some fun. This kind of tension is likely not part of the design goal, and should be avoided.
Now let’s look at the example on the right. We’ve replaced Bell Gothic with the stately Sabon. Sabon, which is a serif typeface, works very well with Trade Gothic. They are both focused on bold clarity with highly-readable glyphs due to their tall x-height. Both typefaces, in this context, are on the same mission, and that makes for a great combination.
Avoid Similar Classifications
Typefaces of the same classification, but from different typeface families, can easily create discord when combined. Their distinct personalities don’t play well off of each other and create a kind of typographic mud if careful attention is not paid.
In the first example on the left side we have a heading set in Clarendon Bold, which is a slab serif. The body copy on the left is Officina Serif which is also a slab serif. Slab serif typefaces are known for their distinct personality, and they like to dominate any area in a design they are used in. Putting two slab serifs together can create a needless and unsightly tension.

Now notice the example on the right side. The Clarendon Bold header is paired with the much-more neutral New Baskerville. New Baskerville is a versatile transitional serif typeface with wide glyphs that goes nicely with the heavy-set Clarendon. At the same time, it backs down and lets Clarendon have all the personality it wants. This combination works quite nicely as a result.
Choosing typefaces from different classifications at the start avoids needless tension in your design and typography later.
Assign Distinct Roles
One very easy way to combine multiple fonts from several typefaces is to design a role-based scheme for each font or typeface, and stick to it. In the next example, we have used Akzidenz Grotesk Bold in all-caps in an author slug on the top. We then use Rockwell Bold for the article heading. Our body copy intro and body copy typeface is Bembo at different sizes. Finally, the second level heading is Akzidenz Grotesk Medium.

We saved the highly-distinct Rockwell for attention-getting headlines, and fallen back to a conservative sans serif heading and serif body copy combination we discussed earlier. But even in that choice, we have a great variation of size, weight and function among the fonts used.
All in all, there are 4 fonts from 3 typefaces being used here, and they all pull together into a cohesive design, because each role assigned to a font is fixed and is very clearly defined in the typographic hierarchy. When in doubt, define!
Contrast Font Weights
A sure-fire way to muddy your typographic hierarchy is to fail to distinguish elements in the hierarchy from one another. In addition to variations in size, make sure you are creating clear differences in font weights to help guide the reader’s eye around your design.
In the example on the left, we have a decent size contrast, but not enough font weight contrast. The Myriad Light, when set above a Minion Bold, tends to fade back and lose visual authority. However, we want the reader’s eye to go to the heading, not the body copy, at least initially.

On the right, we’ve set a Myriad Black above Minion, normal weight. It might be a bit heavy-handed but there is no confusion as to what the reader is supposed to look at first.
Create a Variety of Typographic Colors
Typographic color is the combined effect of the variations of font weight, size, stroke width, leading, kerning, and several other factors. One easy way to see typographic colors is to squint at a layout until you can’t read it anymore, but can still see the text in terms of its overall tonal value.
If you squint at the examples below, you’ll notice that layout on the left bleeds into one undistinguished blob of text, ever so slightly more dense at the bottom. However, the layout on the right retains its visual hierarchy, even if you can’t read it. No matter how far away you are from this page, there is no confusion regarding where the title is, and where your eye should go next.

Clever use of typographic color reinforces the visual hierarchy of a page, which is always directly tied to the meaning of the copy and the desired intention of the message.
Don’t Mix Moods
One often-overlooked typographic mistake is not recognizing the inherent mood of a typeface. Typefaces have personality. They change to some degree based on context, but not greatly. It’s one problem to misidentify the personality of typeface for a particular job, but it’s a double-problem to add another poorly chosen typeface to the mix!
On the left of this example, we have Franklin Gothic Bold paired with Souvenir. The basic feel of Franklin Gothic is stoic, sturdy, strong, but with a refined sense of elegance and mission. It’s not a cuddly, but functional. On the other hand, Souvenir is playful, casual, a little aloof, and very pretty. These two typefaces together come across like a Buckingham Palace guard who is dutifully ignoring a playful little girl at his feet trying to get him to smile. This kind of mixed-mood just doesn’t work very well. Mixing the mood of typefaces can draw attention to the typography instead of the message, which results in a poor design.

On the right, we’ve given Souvenir a more willing playmate. Futura Bold has many personalities, but it’s more than willing to accommodate Souvenir for several reasons. First, both typefaces have high x-heights. Both typefaces have wide glyphs and very circular letter shapes. Both typefaces have a subtle but not overly-prominent quirkiness. Neither dominates the other. They both work, in this example, to create a fun and upbeat mood. There is no sense of undue tension.
Contrast Distinct with Neutral
A clean, readable typographic design requires careful attention to intended and unintended tension. One place to look for unintended tension is with personality clashes among your type choices. If one of your main typefaces has a lot of personality, you might need a secondary typeface to take on a neutral role.
In our example, the left column pairs Dax Bold with Bernhard Modern. This is a poor choice for at least two obvious reasons we’ll examine.

First, Dax has narrow glyphs and a big x-height while Bernhard Modern has some very wide glyphs and one of the lowest x-heights among popular classic typefaces. Second, Dax is an informal, modern, and bright typeface. It’s a great fit for a techie, savvy, modern message. Bernhard Modern on the other hand is classy, quiet, sophisticated, and even a touch intimate. Combine the lack of chemistry among those attributes together with the very different personalities of each typeface and you have a poorly functioning bit of typography.
Let’s look at a better choice. The right column pairs Dax Bold with Caslon. Caslon is an old style typeface, but it’s been modernized and sanitized to play nicely with other typefaces. It works satisfactorily with Dax in this context. Notice how you can see the personality of Dax in the headline, but Caslon steps aside and delivers the reader to the message? In this context, Caslon functions quite well as a neutral choice to support the more flamboyant Dax.
Avoid Combinations That are Too Disparate
When too much contrast is created in certain settings by selecting typefaces that are too much unalike, it can create a visual imbalance which works against the overall design.
On the left, we have Antique Olive Nord — an extremely heavy font — paired with Garamond Narrow. The over-zealous contrast and its effects are apparent. In most cases, this extreme contrast goes beyond attention-getting and goes right to awkward. It doesn’t serve the message of the copy well.

On the right, the Antique Olive Nord has been replaced by a more subdued Antique Olive Bold. Garamond Narrow could have been replaced with a book weight Garamond, but a better choice — after some deliberation — was Chaparral. Chaparral has a higher x-height than Garamond, and overall is a more modern and subsequently more neutral choice to set against the idiosyncratic presence of Antique Olive Bold.
Keep It Simple — Try Just Two Typefaces
In all the effort to sort through large typeface libraries looking for “just the right combination”, it’s often easy to overlook the sometimes obvious and much easier choice: stick to two typefaces using a classic sans serif and serif combination.
In the example below, we’ve created a clear visual hierarchy, got a high degree of variety, created a strong sense of interesting typographic color, all-the-while increasing readability. But it was all done with just two typefaces. However, we are using a total of five fonts: three Helvetica Neues and two Garamonds.

Why does this work so effortlessly? Several factors are at play here. First, when using different fonts from the same typeface, you are likely going to have a high degree of visual compatibility without even working for it. Second, we’ve chosen the tried-and-true combinations of using a classic neutral heading typeface and a classic neutral body typeface.
Both Helvetica Neue and Garamond have distinct yet neutral personalities, and they can weave complex layouts together and around each other because we’ve maintained a strict visual hierarchy. Planning rules and following them, with the right typefaces, can yield great results with a minimum of effort.
Use Different Point Sizes
We saved one of the simplest principles for last: use different point sizes to create contrast and distinction.
In the example on the left, the heading and body copy bleed together into an unsightly blob of text. Use the squint method mentioned above and look at the left example. While still squinting, look at the right and notice the dramatic difference even though it’s blurry!

On the right, we have the same two fonts, but in different sizes. TheMix Italic has been bumped up significantly, while New Century Schoolbook has been decreased to a legible, yet more complimentary size.
Using different point sizes helps distinguish the typographic hierarchy and increase the variety of typographic color.
In Conclusion
The fact that there are no hard and fast rules about combining typefaces can make the process of making good choices time-consuming and maybe even a little exhausting. But it’s also nice to have a handy set of principles, as well as an understanding of certain typographic situations to avoid, to guide the process as quickly as possible to a pleasant typographic result.
Further Resources
You may be interested in the following related articles and resources:
- 29 principles for making great font combinations
Read up on more principles about font combinations - Mixing Typefaces (PDF)
Review this classic chart that rates possible combinations with a 1, 2, & 3 - 4 Techniques for Combining Fonts
Wonderfully illustrated article on how building a palette is an intuitive process, but yet one that can be guided by principles.
Related Posts
You may be interested in the following posts which have been published on Smashing Magazine recently:
- The Beauty Of Typography: Writing Systems And Calligraphy Of The World
- The Ails Of Typographic Anti-Aliasing
- Design Patterns and Best Practices
- 50 Helpful Typography Tools And Resources
- Expressive Web Typography: Useful Examples and Techniques
- 30 New Free High-Quality Fonts
Also, please feel free to follow us on Twitter and join our community on Facebook.
(ik) (vf)





Diego
November 4th, 2010 6:53 amNice post, i love this examples very useful.
Martin
November 4th, 2010 6:53 amClever article, thanks Douglas.
Satish Gandham
November 4th, 2010 6:54 amWowww
I’m so happy to see this tutorial.
I was looking for some tips to improve the typography on my WordPress theme SWIFT
This tutorial is spot on.
CJ Spencer
November 4th, 2010 6:56 amLovely article Douglas
Andrei Gonzales
November 4th, 2010 6:59 amThere is also the “make sure your chosen font family has a diverse set of weights” rule (not just regular, italic, and then the bold versions of both), otherwise your design will be severely limited.
Karm
November 4th, 2010 6:59 amGood read – informative. One thing I would have appreciated are examples displayed on the same background for direct comparison with similar style treatments. This didn’t, however, detract from my enjoyment of the article or the lessons learned. Thanks!
Mark
November 4th, 2010 7:11 amLove the examples, thanks for the post!
Laura
November 4th, 2010 7:12 amVery useful article and a good read – thanks! If I had to make one suggestion I would agree with Karm (above )that it might have been more useful to compare examples on the same background :)
PS – downloading your app now!
danny
November 5th, 2010 1:32 amAgree here with the backgrounds, and even more I think the actual TYPE shoulda been the same colour, and without effects to be really usefull, notice all the “bad” examples are white and Embossed while the “good” are black and Debossed, creating a veeery different feeling.
Nevertheless a good article.
marian
November 5th, 2010 7:12 amMy thoughts exactly. If you want to compare, make them comparable.
However … I enjoyed the article and found it unusually informative and useful.
Niels
November 5th, 2010 2:43 pmSame thing here, it stopped me from reading the full article. And I couldn’t stop wondering if you’ve designed these examples this particular way because you want to show your eye for markup and presentation or to give your point that extra boost of pursuation…
Sorry, I’m not questioning your article and experience (because I’ve only read a few paragraphs), but I simply can’t read / view an article which relies on comparisons which have to much noise around.
Erica
November 4th, 2010 7:15 amExcellent typography primer – guidelines for combining typefaces, are so often overlooked!
Heath Waller
November 4th, 2010 7:23 amWow – I learned so much from this post. As an untrained designer typography is something I still have trouble wrapping my head around. I know good pairing when I see it – but know I understand better why.
This post will be something I’ll reference for future work. Thanks so much for sharing!
starscream
November 4th, 2010 7:27 amjust in time. Tnx for the article!
Tim Wright
November 4th, 2010 7:37 amTypography is something I feel a lot of us struggle with. It’s nice to see an article addressing an issue in a clear and helpful manner. Thanks for putting this together.
pica-ae
November 4th, 2010 7:50 amawesome article, very educational and great to come back to when in doubt
stevemg
November 4th, 2010 7:57 amGreat article. Hoefler & Frere-Jones have some good info on this as well. The focus is on their typefaces but it’s still a good reference point. The forums on typophile.com are also a good resource.
Tom
November 4th, 2010 8:04 amVery nice post! Thanks
AlexT
November 4th, 2010 8:10 amValuable post. I like it when it stays focused on a very specific aspect of a matter. Next step: White balance in typography?
Garrick Van Buren
November 4th, 2010 8:19 amover at Kernest.com, we’ve kicked off a new membership program all about combining typefaces: kernest.com/konstellations
Pedro Blanco
November 4th, 2010 8:20 amVery Nice Post !! Thanks !!
Mark
November 4th, 2010 8:24 amGreat article. This is the worst part of my design skillset – typography. Which is probably the most important.
Rebecca
November 5th, 2010 10:07 amsame with me, this article really helps….
Megan
November 4th, 2010 8:26 amAwesome!! Type nerds rock. It’s amazing how many designers don’t practice or even know the value of good typographic skills. It really is the keystone to high vernacular in design.
m
November 4th, 2010 8:33 am“Sabon works very well with Trade Gothic which is a serif typeface.”
I think that needs to be reworded. Sabon is serif and Trade Gothic is sans (right?).
Julian Gaviria
November 4th, 2010 8:33 amGreat article. Things that are slightly over looked but very important to a website.
Joseph Cohen - UX Designer
November 4th, 2010 8:40 amGreat post
Kenny Brijs
November 4th, 2010 8:44 amIt’s been a while since I’ve read an article of this quality.
I’ve been wanting to get to know more about typography for a while, this article introduced me to some terms while giving me a lot of usable information in a “starter friendly way”.
Thanks.
OpusWebDesign
November 4th, 2010 8:49 amMan this is awesome! You are awesome! I love the lexicon of adjectives you use to describe the relationships between and idiosyncratic personalities of different fonts. Your book is going in my Xmas wish list! :D
A great weekend to you, sir!
Sarah
November 4th, 2010 9:02 amExcellent article, thanks! I enjoyed reading it and know I will come back to reference this in the future.
dixhuit
November 4th, 2010 9:18 amReally interesting read. Cheers!
Douglas Bonneville
November 4th, 2010 9:25 amThanks for the kind words on the article. But thanks to Vitaly and team for the opportunity to write at Smashing Magazine.
@Megan gets Comment of the Day: “[Typography] really is the keystone to high vernacular in design.” I love the sound of that bit of prose :)
@M
You are right. It should be “Sabon, which is a serif typeface, works very well with Trade Gothic”. I’ll see if I can get that fixed.
@OpusWebDesign
It’s so boring to write boring, so I try to amuse myself first and foremost. Then I hope my amusement gets across to the reader :) I personally like to be educated and entertained at the same time. It increases retention!
Vitaly Friedman (Editor-in-chief of Smashing Magazine)
November 5th, 2010 2:17 am@Douglas, thanks, we just fixed the Sabon/Trade Gothic error. And thank you for your beautiful article, look forward to be working with you again on the next article!
Paul Ciccone
November 4th, 2010 9:44 amLove it! Thanks.
Chris
November 4th, 2010 11:03 amGreat post thanks for sharing with us.
Martin LeBlanc
November 4th, 2010 12:21 pmFantastic examples – just what I was looking for – thank you!
Ruan Deyzel
November 4th, 2010 12:32 pmVery insightful thank you, have always underestimated the importance of typography in design. This has made me see the bigger picture :)
John
November 4th, 2010 12:43 pmGreat post. Quick question: what did you use to generate the sample text?
Douglas Bonneville
November 4th, 2010 2:22 pm@ John: I just used Photoshop. It’s all one master file with examples grouped into folders and a master effects layer or two.
If you want a copy of the PSD, email me at douglas [at] bonfx.com and I’ll send it to you. Of course the fonts won’t work unless you have the same ones, but you can get the gist of how the examples work.
John
November 5th, 2010 7:36 amActually, I wondered how you generated the text itself; it reads as if program generated.
Eroxx
November 6th, 2010 7:52 amHey Douglas
Can u please list the layer effects that used
Thank u for a grew post!
Douglas Bonneville
November 8th, 2010 10:45 amI’ve posted the PSD for anyone to grab and explore at:
http://bonfx.com/free-psd-from-smashing-magazine-article-combining-typefaces/
Drew
November 4th, 2010 12:58 pmI know when type looks good, and when type looks bad. But articles like this really help me understand and be able to articulate *why*. Knowing that, I feel much more capable of actually using type effectively myself rather than just appreciating it.
Thanks!
Martin Silvertant
November 4th, 2010 4:02 pmYou wrote an article concerning things I already knew, but it was an interesting read nevertheless. I can’t agree with a few of your statements and examples though.
“They [Trade Gothic & Sabon] are both focused on bold clarity with highly-readable glyphs due to their tall x-height.”
That’s clearly true for Trade Gothic, but Sabon is a Garalde, which almost always means a relatively small x-height. And bold clarity? Why do you think the transitional serif, slab serif and sans serif were developed? Because the Venetian and Garalde types weren’t what you would define as bold clarity. Sabon is not the greatest choice for that example. I would have gone for a more modern serif with a slightly lower contrast and taller x-height.
“In the example on the left [with Myriad Light for the heading and Minion Bold for the body text] , we have a decent size contrast, but not enough font weight contrast.”
I agree that it’s generally smart to give headers some weight, but there are (of course) exceptions that work excellent. Open a fashion/women’s magazine and you will see plenty of headings in hairline sans serifs. Though of course they don’t set the body text in a bold font…
“Let’s look at a better choice. The right column pairs Dax Bold with Caslon. Caslon is an old style typeface, but it’s been modernized and sanitized to play nicely with other typefaces. It works satisfactorily with Dax in this context.”
Caslon is certainly a good choice for setting body text in print, but I don’t see how a Garalde fits with an ultra modern typeface such as Dax.
And lastly, I like the colors of the pictures, but I feel like you’re cheating a bit by setting the wrong example in white on a dark background and the (supposedly) correct example in black on a light background as the latter environment is already easier to read; the purely typographical impact could potentially have been obtained by setting both examples in the same colors so it’s a fair comparison and the significance of the choice of type would have become more apparent.
I might sound negative, but in all honesty and besides the points I just made, great article!
PS: I know your work and experience so I hope I didn’t sound condescending; I’ve learned that typography – regardless of all those rules which are based on scientific aspects such as human perception and how the eyes/mind read(s) words – is quite a subjective area; not every typeface or combination of typefaces appeal to everyone or are equally well perceived, after all.
Douglas Bonneville
November 4th, 2010 7:19 pmHi Martin: To keep the article short, I couldn’t go into every detail or back every assertion with detail. Regarding Sabon, I could have qualified what I meant about its x-height when compared to other similar serifs, like Garamond, Bembo, or Arno to name few popular ones. Yes, compared to Trade Gothic, the Sabon x-height is not as tall. That could be more clear.
Dax and Caslon? It’s admittedly arbitrary, but the point of this article was to give plausible options for designers struggling with this topic with fonts they likely already had. Notice I qualified the use of Caslon only as a *sufficient* choice. There are certainly better modern serifs, but they are less likely to be known on a first name basis. Caslon is easily one the top 20 fonts of all time, and likely to get used a lot because of how its distributed with software packages from Adobe, for instance.
“I feel like you’re cheating a bit by setting the wrong example in white on a dark background and the (supposedly) correct example in black on a light background…”
I’m 100% busted on that one. A little drama never hurt anyone, right? Someone else pointed that out too. I think the next round we’ll do the same background and colors. Either way, the examples are fun to come up with.
And I agree, typeface combinations are absolutely subjective :)
Rock
November 4th, 2010 4:03 pmIt was pleasure reading your post. Thanks for sharing with us.
Flash Animations
Tomas
November 4th, 2010 4:52 pmLike always! good post and examples/showcases
josh
November 4th, 2010 5:13 pmThis is a classic combination, and it’s almost impossible to get wrong.
What
Alfonse Surigao
November 4th, 2010 7:06 pmThis is a great article! It really opened my eyes concerning typographic use. And I really love the examples as well. Thanks!
Alexandrae
November 4th, 2010 7:17 pmGreat post! thanks
Brandon
November 4th, 2010 8:23 pmI read smashing every day and I don’t think I have ever commented, but I think you are definitely one of the best writers on here. It shows especially in the comments section where you take the critique with a grace usually unseen in the blog format.
Douglas Bonneville
November 4th, 2010 11:10 pmThank you Brandon. I think you, likewise, are one of the best commenters on Smashing, if you don’t mind me saying so :). I could be biased though.
One of my most effective strategies for writing is maintaining a healthy fear of the “Submit” button, especially when that button sends a copy of what I’m writing to the Smashing editorial team. Don’t think twice, think like nine or eleven times before hitting that button!
Robert
November 4th, 2010 9:34 pmInteresting. It’s funny, because I don’t “think” about it as much as the above. I just “do” and I think I have the right eye to make decisions on the fly. But for junior designers, this is a great guide. It’s funny, because within a few seconds of glancing at your examples, I can see why some combinations work and some don’t immediately. Your explanations as to those harmonies and discourse – if not always based in rational reasoning – make sense. Good call.
Douglas Bonneville
November 4th, 2010 11:17 pmRobert : I agree rational deduction only takes you so far in many cases. But intuition is effective in direct relation to the facts and knowledge from which it leaps. So you study some rules, then you put the rules aside and play around. The rules keep you in the playground and out of the traffic in the street :).
paulb
November 4th, 2010 10:48 pmVery well written article, and has helped me immensely! Thanks SM! My favorite line and awesome metaphor!
“These two typefaces together come across like a Buckingham Palace guard who is dutifully ignoring a playful little girl at his feet trying to get him to smile.”
Gaurav Sharma
November 4th, 2010 11:09 pmVery informative article. Shows how simple yet complicated Typography is. AWESOME!!!
monkeygeorge
November 5th, 2010 1:00 amThank you so much for this gift of knowledge. It brightened my day, and it’s not yet 10 A.M. I often wondered why my intuition didn’t always give interesting graphic results ;) I understand now!
Martin Paevatalu
November 5th, 2010 1:09 amNice article.
In the “Avoid Similar Classifications” section you say that in the left example the body copy on the left is Officina Serif. But the picture says it’s Joanna.
Douglas Bonneville
November 7th, 2010 7:20 pmHi Martin: The original example referenced Joanna, but I changed it to Officina in the copy. The corrected graphic is there now. Thanks!
zihotki
November 5th, 2010 1:28 amHi,
Why do you use Sans Serifs for headings and Serif for content? I thought that Sans Serifs are more readable on PCs and it will be better to use them for main content on the web. Is it a kind of a personal preference?
Thanks in advance
Douglas Bonneville
November 5th, 2010 6:16 amHi Zihotki: We aren’t necessarily talking about web. This article applies to both web and print. Sans Serifs are not necessarily more legible on on the web than serifs. Georgia, for instance, is used all over the web for both heading and body. But in creating combinations of typefaces, you normally don’t want to combine two sans serif typefaces. So if one needs to go sans, it’s usually the header or headline. Look at some popular news papers, for instance. Yes, there is a combination of both practical and personal preference.
zihotki
November 5th, 2010 3:11 pmThanks for explanation. Yep, in real world the things are like you said. I’m not a designer but a programmer and I just like this stuff too and learn it. Thanks a lot.
Dave
November 6th, 2010 2:48 pmHave to disagree about the readability bit – the majority of computer displays have much lower resolution than printed media, which means that for small sizes a sans-serif will generally be more readable, which is the reverse of print. But of course, defining exactly what size the cross-over occurs at is dependant on the particular fonts in use…
Douglas Bonneville
November 7th, 2010 7:25 pmI think the overall amount of text and width of the text container need to be considered on the web too. Text of any substantial length on the web or print is best handled by serifed fonts when set at a decent or user-adjustable size.
greg urbano
November 5th, 2010 2:09 amexcellent posting, i need to bookmark for future reference
Andrew
November 5th, 2010 2:52 amGood article.
One point I’d make: I keep seeing (presumably webkit) debossed body text all over the web these days, and I find it terribly unreadable. I agree the effect can look good when applied judiciously on header text, but not on body text. Just because you *can* do it, doesn’t mean you *should*.
Douglas Bonneville
November 5th, 2010 10:31 amLoud and clear from quite a few people: no more embossing. Got it! I’m late to the trend. Perhaps “embossed text” can join “glossy web 2.0 icons” in an article about overused design trends :).
theneos
November 5th, 2010 3:33 amNice article. Very informative especially for a newbie like me. Another thing I appreciate is that the author respond to comments actively unlike others I’ve seen that just posts and seldom if ever respond to readers. two thumbs up to you!
Will
November 5th, 2010 5:23 amThis is perhaps the best article I’ve read on SM, an extremely informative and entertaining read.
I agree with some readers’ comments regarding the cheeky background colours used and the need for embossing and debossing.
Bookmarking this article for future reference!
marvin case
November 5th, 2010 6:00 amGreat post!
Arantxa
November 5th, 2010 6:11 amWonderful post, I will print it and stick it in the wall before my eyes :)
Justin Moreland
November 5th, 2010 7:39 amReminds me of this article: http://www.typography.com/email/2010_03/index_tw.htm
That might be a great article to link to.
Douglas Bonneville
November 6th, 2010 9:55 amHi Justin: If you check out the resource section at the end of the article, you’ll find that the HF&J article was indeed referenced. One of the best, short articles you can read on combining typefaces.
Chris
November 5th, 2010 8:32 amThanks! This was a great post.
Rebecca
November 5th, 2010 10:17 amThis is a great article for designers, both web & print. No matter what our experience level may be, there is always room to know more. Thank you Douglas and SM!
Markus
November 5th, 2010 11:46 amGreat article. This is a great example for good typography! Thank you very much!
Chrissy
November 5th, 2010 1:53 pmGreat article! I just taught a lesson today on readability, legibility and finding a good typeface balance. Will share this article with my class.
Ralph
November 5th, 2010 2:25 pmI find my self too often struggling with combining typefaces that are in love with each other so to speak, so this info is very useful to me. Thank for the great article!
francesco
November 5th, 2010 2:30 pmVery useful guide for who creates stuff everyday.
You gone deep explaining all pro and cons of every solution, Douglas. Great work indeed.
sinetics
November 5th, 2010 3:50 pmExactly what I was looking for. Useful, thank you!
Fabian
November 5th, 2010 3:54 pmThank you for such a wonderful and informative article.
fontburger
November 5th, 2010 4:08 pmHooray my favorite kind of article! Great examples!
Steve G
November 5th, 2010 5:57 pmThanks
Colby
November 6th, 2010 12:18 amGreat! Thanks so much. You’ve opened my eyes to some great-looking typefaces I hadn’t heard of too.
dave
November 6th, 2010 3:41 amA great article on the often overlooked importance of good use of typography in web design.
Beben Koben
November 6th, 2010 3:51 amthanks a lot \m/
ed
November 6th, 2010 6:07 amA little late to the comment party on this one… but THANK YOU for this article!
As someone who is in the “creative” industry, but is NOT a designer, these little hints/tips are like GOLD.
While I *can* design some good stuff if need be (and I have the time, lol), and am a HUGE fan of design in general, and type design in particular, I’m by no means a natural designer.
So, again, thanks.
@Smashing Magazine: more bite-sized chunks like this would be great. Maybe a primer on GRIDS next?
Extension:103
November 6th, 2010 1:40 pmGreat article, nice to see some TRADITIONAL design practises being filter through onto the web, everyones so hung up on ‘web 2.0′ nobody seems to make informed desicions on topic content and combining relavant styles to suit.
Krystian
November 6th, 2010 5:55 pmGreat article. We recently launched http://www.ifontyou.com which is a font matching website. I think it will complement this article quite well.
Douglas Bonneville
November 7th, 2010 6:37 pmHi Krystian: I saw your site all over twitter last week and RT’d myself. Very clever site and I hope it takes off!
Max
November 7th, 2010 4:56 amgreat article, the large font in the last example is actually TheMix from the Thesis family.
Douglas Bonneville
November 7th, 2010 7:17 pmMax: You are correct. The Thesis superfamily refers to TheMix as a “style”, and not a typeface, which can be a little confusing when referencing it. I fixed the copy and the graphic.
kaolti
November 7th, 2010 6:14 amBest article i’ve read in a long time on SM!
Amy
November 7th, 2010 12:31 pmThumbs up from this cranky, experienced designer. These examples are spot on and are typesetting principles any designer, print or web, should know inside out and put into practice daily.
(This also reminded me of my bone to pick with the innumerable self-designated “typographic” WordPress themes out there. Every time I look at one [breathlessly, because I want to see great typography in a theme], I’m utterly disappointed. They’re obviously made by people who know absolutely nothing about type and think using 2x leading or making type a super light gray = “typography.”)
Monika
November 7th, 2010 1:43 pmGreat article! I wish I had read it earlier!
Megan Y
November 7th, 2010 7:36 pmGreat informative read. I learnt some new tricks.
I would have preferred that the left and right examples were the same font and background colour though, as different background colours make a huge difference in how text legibility is perceived.
If they were both the same, we could get a more accurate look and comparison between the different font layouts and see how better choices in typefaces does make a difference. Just makes it a bit more difficult the way it was done, in my opinion.
But overall a great piece which is now bookmarked for later reference!
Vanja
November 7th, 2010 11:34 pmHow come there isn’t a single example of a good use of sans-serif font for body copy?
Douglas Bonneville
November 8th, 2010 1:01 amHi Vanja: To keep the article to a practical length, we had to limit the scope of the examples we produced. In one of my other articles listed in the resource section, you can see we could have created 30 or so examples or more. Most of the principles listed above could easily apply to a sans-serif body with a serif or sans-serif header or display typeface. We had to cut somewhere :).
Adele Hadfield
November 8th, 2010 7:51 amGreat post, enjoyed reading and seeing the examples and comments! Check out some of our thoughts and opinions whitespace-blog.co.uk. Thanks, Adele
Ha Nguyen
November 8th, 2010 9:07 amAwesome! Thank you so much!
Tony Blade
November 8th, 2010 4:21 pmSome time ago I was reading an amazing book about typography and it appears that in print, it is easier to read serif font in main copy and san serif in headlines – in contrast with screen typography. It may seem really boring for the beginners but the more You design, You start to like it, than love it and at the and You are a typography fanatic! :D
Miro
November 8th, 2010 11:04 pmI must be totally misfitted: I love the Trade Gothic Bold/Bell Gothic and Myriad Light/Minion Bold combinations!
Trade Gothic Bold does its work for a heading and Bell Gothic is a delight to read.
Myriad Light make me stay a long time on the heading, licking the slim lines (maybe that is the problem, spending to much time on the header) While Minion Bold will make a good steady ingress after that.
Douglas Bonneville
November 9th, 2010 7:50 amHi Miro: Really, depending on context, content, and the roles of each typeface, you could just about any typefaces to play nice with each other. If you see something redeeming in on of the “bad” examples, you should run with it and optimize it. BTW, Bell Gothic is one of my current “new” old favorites :).
Marius
November 9th, 2010 5:25 amAnother great article. thanx for the effort. much appreciated.
basana
November 9th, 2010 7:25 pmGreat Article. Tk you for sharing.
onearmfrog
November 10th, 2010 2:30 amExcellent article! Thank you!
Adam
November 10th, 2010 7:56 amThis clarifies some typography questions I have been pondering for quite some time. Thank you so much – hugely helpful to my understanding of typographic design. You have done a good deed kind sir.
Tina_Ta
November 10th, 2010 8:58 amIt helps a lot with my design skill. Thanks heaps Douglas!
john
November 11th, 2010 10:29 amusefull, usefull :) Thanks
brannon
November 11th, 2010 1:41 pmvery good information. thanks.
also, i want to point out some minor things. assigning roles section: p3 l2 – ‘roll’ should be ‘role’. keep it simple: p1 l2-3 ‘…using a classic sans serif and [serif] combination.’ sorry to nitpick.
Douglas Bonneville
November 12th, 2010 12:06 amThanks Brannon! I fixed both errors. Excellent eye!
Jamie Taniguchi
November 12th, 2010 11:36 amGreat article, however as Douglas mentioned in the comments the example images were done in Photoshop. For those who are developing for the web you should be aware this is not what you’ll actually see.
The context in which the images show make it seem like it’s being used in practice on an actual web based page, not a infographic or something that would be a graphic itself. Photoshop has a greater granularity for smoothing out fonts, which does not translate to what you would actually see on the page in a browser, even when using things such as font-smooth in CSS. PS is giving a beer goggle sort of vision that may not play the font out as you’d expect. Personally I would have liked to have seen these fonts actually being used in practice than to have been done in Photoshop.
typegoodness
November 14th, 2010 11:06 amgreat article as always
shod4n
November 16th, 2010 6:08 pmGreat article! Even if I know a lot about typography and I agree with everything here, I saved this article for later. Love the examples ; )
Dan Mayer
December 8th, 2010 3:08 amLove the dutiful Buckingham Palace Guard / little girl analogy!
nick
December 21st, 2010 2:55 pmpar excellence article!
Kars
December 22nd, 2010 6:00 amMost of the time a sans-serif heading with serif body text is suggested, but when I look around on websites (maybe I’m looking at the wrong places) I often see the contrary, where there is a serif heading with sans serif body text. How come? I thought perhaps because sans-serif mostly looks better on the web.
Jose Melgar
January 7th, 2011 4:49 amGreat article! I just didn’t quite understand the “mood” section, let me read again, but in the meantime, any help is welcomed.
Bang Digital
January 27th, 2011 3:20 pmGood article.
However, it’s interesting that you’ve used a far more readable light background colour for the ‘correct’ combinations.
It would be interesting to see the designs with the ‘good’ typeface combinations using the wackier background colours.
Douglas Bonneville
April 8th, 2011 10:56 am@ Bang: My next article addressed the coloring of the examples, where you can see I put both examples on the same visual footing to make comparisons more easily:
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2011/03/24/how-to-choose-a-typeface
Kenny
February 9th, 2011 11:02 pmI think this is one of the best “art of typography” articles on the web today. Great concepts that are relevant to everyday work, and perfect examples to go with each. Thanks for sharing your insight!
ozzy
March 18th, 2011 12:02 amThanks a lot… it’s exactly what I needed… I am trying to arrange a document, and make it appear more serious… I’m not a professional designer, but with these basics is enough for me!!!
Martin Baker
March 19th, 2011 3:01 amVery interesting article. It is fascinating to see which combinations work and which don’t.
profeivan
April 17th, 2011 7:51 amGreat tutorial! I would like to ask you for permission for translating this post into spanish.
Gemma
June 4th, 2011 2:44 pmHi,
Thank you for this article. I’m very inexperienced with typography.
I guess this article, and most other articles are referring to pairing typefaces for body text and headlines.
But what about selecting a typeface for logotypes that will complement the body text and headlines on websites? This is what I’m struggling with at the moment. I would love to read an article that explains the “rules” for selecting a typeface for logotypes to complement the rest of the site’s typography.