I keep experimenting with fonts which will prove readable on most computer monitors -- in vain. What looks good on my flat-panel Windows monitors looks like garbage on my 10-year old 'fat' monitors. Can't seem to find one font which suits all. Comic Sans MS, Georgia, Gill Sans, Arial Rounded MT Bold read the best -- but sometimes they're too dark or too light. Use the Tools Internet Options Accessibility Ignore Font Styles options in IE browser; if that doesn't work, use Tools Internet Options Fonts button and experiment with the font which works well for you in Medium through Smallest View sizes. Wish I could reliably predict what font that would be. The Arial default is barely visible, imo.
Internet Explorer can't well display fonts. What follows below might provide some helpful eye-easing help. If you like this background color, it's R254 G244 B201, html code fef4cb. You can view source on any html page and look for the "bgcolor" in the first "body" statement, and just copy that code. Wish folks wouldn't use the white so much. It's glaring. So I try to avoid using it in all my sites. If that annoys you, just keep reading this page to see how you can change the background.
Monitors caveat: the higher the monitor resolution, the smaller the dialog boxes and default Windows font sizes. So if you make fonts bigger for internetting, then your dialog boxes will be gigantic. Yet to make them smaller, is to make viewing everything else, problemmatic. What to do? After four years of experimentation on four types of monitors (new and old), I find that the clearest views result from the following settings:
Frankly, the older and smaller monitors are better at making fonts readable on any website (the flat panel monitors are often HARDER to read, text-wise). So think twice before upgrading?
So if you get hard-to-read main text in my sites, try those changes. (You might have to reboot afterwards.)
Same, for webpage colors. Some kind of pale yellow or pink background seems to work best at handling any color of text. Second to that, (oddly enough), flesh (HTML="FFDFAF" or near it). Of course, you can always turn down the brightness knob on your monitor! (Reminder: in HTML, codes are in RRGGBB format, meaning: R(ed)R(ed)G(reen)G(reen)B(lue)B(lue). So if you wanted a lighter flesh color, you'd change the "A" in "FFDFAF" upward a notch, and test. 0-9, then A-F is the order of less-ness. THINK PROPORTIONS, so if you lighten BB, and you want to keep shade true, you'll have to lighten RR and GG in the same amount.)
Some sites use special fonts to get a particular 'look'. "Salvation Components" uses "Folio Md BT" to get chart spacing to work; I'll fix it later so it won't matter what font is used. The "Thinking Out Loud" series uses the following fonts: Gill Sans MT (my new favorite font for flat-screen monitors), Georgia, Sylfaen, Arial MT Rounded Bold, Trebuchet MS, Lithograph, Matura MT Script Capitals, Lucida Handwriting, and Ruach LET. So if you don't have these fonts in your Windows/Fonts directory, you might get strange-looking text. I'd appreciate a complaining email -- or write anonymously in one of the blog or feedback pages (link in top 1/10 of Home Page) -- if that happens to you. Matura MT Script is essential to the SatStrat.htm page, as its UNreadability is a way of stressing Satan would like it very much if we couldn't read BIBLE. That script was the most common script used to write Bible for centuries (well, closest thing I could find to the uncials).
You can override fonts and colors from your 'Explorer Tools, Options, Accessibility menu options; Font size, from View menu. Or, you can edit the HTML Source: within BODY you'll find a "text=" you can edit, and the "font face=" command is just after the first "BODY" tag.
By the way, midnight blue is sharper (easier) to read than black text. You can create it by Tools, Options, Colors, click on the "Text" color, then override by selecting custom colors, and type in these values: Red=0, Green=0, Blue=152 (HTML equivalent is "000098"). You can go darker (lower the "9") or lighter (use a-f in lieu of the "9", "f" being lightest): the blue box at the left of the color indicator changes as you move the little triangle. I like 0 0 184 ("0000a8") best; a slightly-lighter blue ("000b8") is sometimes better, even -- depends on the background you choose. Backgrounds should be of reverse-base shade, generally (i.e., blue on pink or yellow or especially beige/cream, but not blue). Sometimes same-shade background works better, and I don't know WHY (aaargh).
Other good viewing-text colors are purples (993399 or lower); here on this page you see a forest green ("003300" -- 66 88 or 99 is good, too -- below 77 prints most clearly), because green offers less glare yet still good contrast. Decide for yourself which you like better. For reds, it's kinda dicey: a brighter red won't define well on medium backgrounds. CONTRAST (between font and background) seems to work better if colors are of opposite brightness classes (dull+sharp). It's not always true, though: dunno why.
PRINTING QUIRKS IN EXPLORER:
BTW, Trebuchet MS makes a GREAT printing font in smaller or smallest View size, if you have it. If you have Win98 or XP, it should be on your OEM CD/diskettes. The Win98 font is far better, imo.
In website writing, I pick Biblically-significant fonts whenever I can. You can download them from this webpage, if you choose.
There should be no copyright violation, since these are all fonts which come with the various Windows versions, mostly prior to XP, so there's no one to pay for the fonts (no support). I'm sure if we could know who to pay for fonts no one supports, we'd want to do that. Pending someone giving me that answer, I can't link to any place of purchase. Indirectly or directly, any Windows computer has 'paid' for these fonts, it seems. They come pre-installed. All the files here come FROM pre-installed fonts my Windows computers.
For the problem was, as Windows upgraded from '95 onward, they sometimes discarded some prior good fonts (aarrggh) in their service packs(?). By the time XP came out, they must have realized that error and inserted them again, for many of the fonts below are all standard in XP Professional (on my Sams' Club-purchased copy, anyway).
In all these pages, the idea is to show the reader where I 'get' something in Bible, so he can better refute or confirm, what's said.
So if you right-click on your bottom task bar and select "Tile Windows" (either horizontally or vertically, to taste) you can easily view whatever webpage references the text, with another page containing the text itself. In Print Preview of Word, you can select "Two Pages" (bottom of the list where the percentage appears) and see multiple verses all on the same screen. Marvelous help, these two Windows functions.
Font testing: In browser "View", experiment with Medium, Smaller, and Smallest to see if readability remains. Need good white space between lines for eye ease. Fuzziness of characters is a no-no. Flat panel versus older klunky monitors read each font very differently. The smaller the flat panel monitor, the worse the text appears. Color background seems to matter more with some fonts, than others. Bulletted fonts below looked the best after this testing, on my Dell 8400 19" flat panel monitor.
This is in Arial font, the Windows default which I can't stand (too light). The font of the next sentence is "Courier New" (like a typewriter); if you see this font repeated below, it means your browser doesn't have the font name listed, so reverts to "Courier New" ==> This is Courier New font's sample text, should be boringly spread-out.
Click here to download Trebuchet MS regular font; then copy it to your Windows/Fonts directory. It was standard on older versions of Windows. This is in Trebuchet MS font, used to be Win95 and 98 standard font, but now is hard to find (unless you keep good backups) -- until Windows XP (where it is again, standard). "Trebuchet" is French for "catapult" (to break through castle walls in a siege); that's what Paul's saying about how God's plan for our lives works, due to the Cross (2Cor10:3-5): functionally catapulting us up to His Level, never mind the 'castle' of our finiteness/sin nature. So I use this font a lot. It looks better on klunky monitors, not as good on flat-panel. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. Click here to download Trebuchet MS italic font, and then copy, as before. Click here to download Trebuchet MS bold italic font. This is how Trebuchet looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. Click here to download Trebuchet MS bold font. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Franklin Gothic Medium font, works best in View Smaller. Darker base than most, but maybe too uniform. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Franklin Gothic Medium Cond font, used often in webpage links. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Comic Sans MS font. All versions of Windows have this font; it doesn't handle bold well. Wish I could use it, but it's too politically-incorrect for Bible writing? THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Kristen ITC font. Too bad it's so politically-incorrect. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Eras Demi ITC font. Good readability, but a tad too dark. The "Light" version is way too light. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
Click here to download Lithograph font; then copy to your Windows/Fonts subdirectory. It was standard in Win98 (and probably 95) but is not in XP. God says He writes on us 'stones'; it was the main promise of the Word in Writing, in Jer31:31-34, which passage is endlessly referenced in the NT. All the 'building' terms in the NT refer back to that passage, for example. So the Lord, Paul, and Peter, the writer of Hebrews, and even John, play on the 'stone' meaning a lot in the Greek (you can't always see the wordplay in English). So lithography seems an apt font to use: but sparingly. This is in Lithograph font. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. Its chisled appearance resembles the original-language texts (which have no spaces between words, or punctuation).
Click here to download Matura Script Capitals font; then copy to your Windows/Fonts subdirectory. It was standard in Win98 (and probably 95) and is standard again in XP. In my pages, it's only used in SatStrat.htm, but the usage is important: to show how Satan's plan makes Bible pretty but unintelligible, just like uncials and miniscules in the 4th-9th centuries AD. This is in Matura Script Capitals font. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
Click here to download Ruach LET font; then copy to your Windows/Fonts subdirectory. It was standard in Win98 (and probably 95) and is standard again in XP. In my pages, it's used sparingly, for it must be large, to be readable (kinda like God, huh). In Hebrew, "ruach" means "Spirit" (as in Holy Spirit); so the font shows God's Love succinctly, at dramatic moments in webpage text. This is in Ruach LET.
This is in Century font. Most versions of Windows have this font; good use of white space. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Georgia font. It is in Win98 fontsets as well; I don't like its use of white space. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in MS Reference Serif font (MS Serif for Win98), used in Thinking series; it's a warmed-over Georgia, but not compatible with earlier versions of Windows, lol. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Rockwell font, and it seems one of easier fonts to read, thus far, good use of white space; but is it too rounded, informal? THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Book Antiqua font. Win98 fontsets include it, too. Seems too fuzzy on a flat panel monitor. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Palatino Linotype font; some older versions of Windows have it also, I forget which ones. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Sylfaen font; it's in the same family as Palatino and Antiqua, but is crisper in Medium (Palatino is crisper in Smaller). I love this font, but only XP has it. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Perpetua font. All Win98 font sets have this font. It's a bit too small to qualify as a main font. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Garamond font. It is in Win98 fontsets as well. Way too fuzzy on a flat panel monitor. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Lucida Sans font. Only looks good in View Smaller/Smallest. Clearer than Tahoma or Verdana (below). Win 98 font sets have Lucida Sans. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Tahoma font. Too big, too light; but it's a Windows XP and Excel default. It seems to be good only in View Smaller size, but is it too light? THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Verdana Ref font. Too big, too light. It has the same problem as Tahoma, right? THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Kartika font. It would be good for top-page weblinks or small-font notes so you wouldn't need to say font size. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Franklin Gothic Demi Cond font. It's a better font for top page weblinks than Gill Sans MT Condensed? THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Gill Sans MT Condensed font. In Win98SE fontsets, it's Gill Sans Condensed. THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Abadi MT Condensed font. It's a better font for top page weblinks than Gill Sans MT Condensed? THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
This is in Vrinda font. It seems somewhat better than Kartika? THIS IS HOW IT DISPLAYS CAPITAL LETTERS. This is how it looks if you turn on the italicized version of the font in a longer sentence to test readability. If you bold the sentence AND STICK IN CAPITALS and turn on italics and drive yourself crazy picking fonts wondering if only you can't stand reading Windows too-light, too-small default Arial fonts, this is how it looks. This is font size 1 for footnotes. Is it good to read, bad, a pain, who-cares?
2023 Update: a lot of the pages have since been reformatted by me (not brainout) for better viewing on modern displays and current web standards -- some of the legacy code still remains but it would take a lifetime to redo it all. A good portion of these tips are also quite old since the site has been around as early as Y2K, originally hosted on geocities.
If you wish to 'listen' to brainout's LordPages with audio, I would recommend using the Read-Aloud Firefox plugin.
There are also TTS conversions of the LordPages on the new archive YouTube channel.
If you wish to view the website in a darker colour scheme, I would suggest Dark Reader which automatically allows you to darken all elements and fonts.