Type for Text

Carl Shank • June 23, 2023

Type for Text. What type do you use for regular text, such as in books, articles, reports, proposals and the like? A number of typographers and writers throughout history have settled on actually a few few faces that make it to the top of the list for typing regular text. I have noted them and written about them in the graphics below. Some very favorite type for text faces include Adobe Caslon, Adobe Garamond, Janson Text, and Times New Roman, all of which have been faithfully used throughout the history of book making. Designed by Robert Slimbach, Arno Pro is also a favorite face of mine that I have used in a number of books I have written. I find the face inviting, clear, very readable and legible and dense enough and comfortable enough for any reader.


Myfonts.com notes this about the Arno font — "Named after the Florentine river which runs through the heart of the Italian Renaissance, Arno draws on the warmth and readability of early humanist typefaces of the 15th and 16th centuries. While inspired by the past, Arno is distinctly contemporary in both appearance and function. Designed by Adobe Principal Designer Robert Slimbach, Arno is a meticulously-crafted face in the tradition of early Venetian and Aldine book typefaces. Embodying themes Slimbach has explored in typefaces such as Minion and Brioso, Arno represents a distillation of his design ideals and a refinement of his craft. As a multi-featured OpenType family, with the most extensive Latin-based glyph complement Adobe has yet offered, Arno offers extensive pan-European language support, including Cyrillic and polytonic Greek. The family also offers such typographic niceties as five optical size ranges, extensive swash italic sets, and small capitals for all covered languages."


What makes a font a good and highly usable text font? John McWade in his expertly written and illustrated Before & After Magazine series, said it well — "The hallmarks of good text type are legibility and readability. Legibility refers to clarity; it's how readily one letter can be distinguished from all others. Readability refers to how well letters interact to compose words, sentences and paragraphs. When evaluating the choices,, your operative word is medium." (John McWade, Before & After, Vol. 4. No. 3. 1994) Medium fonts include fonts with medium x-height, that is the height of a lowercase letter of a typeface, fonts with medium height-to-width ratio in the individual letters, that is, letters that do not look distorted or weirdly shaped, and fonts with some variability in stroke weights that distinguish each letter from its neighbors. The latter description leads us away from too uniform geometric sans-serif styles and beautiful, super thin strokes of some modern styles of fonts.


The fonts I have chosen, with help from McWade and others, are great text fonts. They show up well in text heavy applications. I have included some of the history of the font in the ones chosen below. In addition to the faces mentioned above, I have included Stone Serif, a relatively modern face, and Bembo, a stylish face for some jobs. Use these time tested fonts for your heavy text work, and you will not be disappointed.

Successful Layout & Design

Vanity Type

By Carl Shank • June 6, 2026
Reading through an old volume of Frederick Nelson Phillips, Inc, Type Faces:With Which We 'Prove It With Proofs' in Typography for Advertisements (New York, 1924), I came across some type that falls outside of the standard typography models, called "vanity type." The term “vanity typography” is not a formal category in typographic history like Old Style, Transitional, Modern, or Sans Serif. Designers typically use the phrase informally to describe typography that draws attention primarily to itself rather than serving the text or reader. Vanity typography occurs when type is used as a display of the designer's skill, fashion, or personal taste rather than to improve communication. Readability is sometimes sacrificed for self-expression and artistic flair. Such type styles use excessive ornamentation, decorative letterforms, overuse of effects like shadows, outlines, gradients and distortions, unusual spacing, and generally typography used to impress rather than inform. Notice in the sample by Phillips, the different "A's," "F's,", "G's," "H's," "L's," "M's," "S's," T's" and "W's." This is not calligraphy lettering, but rather type that could have been used for verses or opening letters to paragraphs or stories.

Puritan Typography

By Carl Shank • May 15, 2026
Puritan Typography Theology Informing Type “Creational realities have not spilled out randomly without purpose; rather, they reflect the wisdom, design, and intention of the good God who made them. It’s our job, then, to observe and learn. . . . And indeed, long before [Jonathan] Edwards began to keep his notebook of earthly pointers to heavenly truths, the seventeenth-century English Puritans were writing lengthy volumes organized around exactly this sort of principle.”[1] “The Puritans were a group of ministers and laypeople within the Church of England who sought to promote Reformed and experiential piety while striving to purify the national church from Roman Catholic influences in doctrine and worship, beginning during the Elizabethan era and continuing as a powerful force until the early eighteenth century. More broadly defined, the Puritan movement included those who were firmly within the Reformed and experiential tradition that flourished not only in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century England, but also well into the eighteenth century north of Hadrian’s Wall (among the Scottish Presbyterians), across the North Sea (among the Dutch Further Reformation divines), and across the Atlantic Ocean (among the New England Puritans and eighteenth-century evangelicals).” [2] Puritan typography flows from Puritan theology. The English Puritans of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries inherited a typographic world shaped by the late Renaissance, the Reformation, and early modern printing. Their type styles were not merely aesthetic choices. Rather, they reflected theology, scholarship, readability, economy, and cultural identity.
Show More