Project 4 - A Short Bibliography, Part 2

In class we took our original bibliography from A Short Bibliography, Part 1 (the one where it was entirely either done in Georgia or Verdana) and tinkered around with the idea of using secondary fonts as either headers of documentations, articles, etc. and what kinds would match up with what. There was also the secondary purpose of learning how to use the @font-face command and how to stack fonts (to which I already know how to do).

Additionally, it was also an exercise as to reading and understanding the legal jargon associated with the use of free materials and how its important to look over that jargon so that you don't end up in deep water for it.

We were told to use a script font found on fontsquirrel.com for the first part of this exercise, as the teacher wanted us to read and understand the legal documentation that often times accompanies free-fonts, as well as to spot what is a good font to use and what is one you shouldn't use based upon what the legal documentation says.

I ended up using a typeface called "Rochester Regular" for this exercise. Mostly because it was Rochester and that was where my boyfriend went to school, and also because it doesn't look terribly hideous sitting next to Verdana.

Second one was a little more tricky because I had to pick my secondary type out by carefully looking as to whether or not the font would clash too terribly with my body-copy font or whether or not it looked too similar to my body-copy font.

I ended up going with a sans-serif like my body-copy. It's called "BubblegumSans Regular". I picked it because it seemed to have a similar x-height to Verdana. It also has similar bowl shapes and apertures. This way the two sans-serifs weren't too entirely different in terms of most structure, but there were enough differences so that you could easily identify they're different.

For example, Verdana and BubblegumSans Regular have very different ascenders and descenders. Verdana's is much straighter, while BubblegumSans Regular has a significant curve to it making it distinguishable to its sans-serif cousin. Going off of that point, BubblegumSans Regular has much more curving to it than Verdana does. Most of Verdana's curving is left entirely to where the bowls sit, whereass BubblegumSans Regular has curving even within its stems.

Looking over them at just a glance, you can tell the two are different fonts. But the differences within their fonts doesn't cause a lot of confusion when looking over or reading text in association with one another. And their common elements allows the viewer to flow from the header of the piece to the body-copy without stop for a significant amount of time to readjust their viewing to a typeface entirely different.