New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
I really like Trebuchet
Posted by cerulean in
27 Apr 2009 — 5:27am
27 Apr 2009 — 5:27am
Trebuchet is a very nice face. It's a well-designed neutral sans with a touch of U.S. Highway for extra clarity. Its personality gives blogs that professional but still personal human voice. Can we hear it for Trebuchet? Humor me.
User login
Support our Sponsors
27 Apr 2009 — 5:54am
It's overlooked and maybe (for an available default font) underused, but I kinda think that's its niche.
27 Apr 2009 — 6:35am
I used to dig it, but now I find it a little on the ugly cousin side. The super short as/descenders make me wilt like an unloved macaroni flower. I used to find the g nice and original, but it calls attention to itself now. I sincerely hope I have not changed your outlook; these are strictly my own thoughts. ; )
27 Apr 2009 — 6:36am
@Eliason Definitely niche. Well put.
27 Apr 2009 — 7:45am
In the fast sea of available typefaces, yea, it's definitely an ugly cousin.
But in the limited invite list for web fonts? It holds its own quite well and is definitely a handy option.
27 Apr 2009 — 8:03am
As aluminum says, I think Trebuchet is good for web, because of the limited list available for that (at this moment, maybe not anymore in the very near future). I like the fact that it has a real italic, not just an oblique.
And don’t forget: Trebuchet is a Vincent Connare design! There is life after Comic Sans…
27 Apr 2009 — 9:46am
> Trebuchet is a Vincent Connare design!
What credence does this lend?
27 Apr 2009 — 3:32pm
I like it.
-=®=-
27 Apr 2009 — 3:57pm
Trebuchet is a very nice face.
Fail.
It’s overlooked
Fail.
I like it.
Fail.
27 Apr 2009 — 6:55pm
>Personal Bio
>A very Good Designer.
Well that doesn't make up for being an ******* does it? ;-)
27 Apr 2009 — 10:49pm
Good home page, though :|
28 Apr 2009 — 4:10am
I hate it. Is it actually supposed to be so lumpy and badly drawn or not? It's hard to tell.
Nick Cooke
28 Apr 2009 — 5:43am
Oh well. My sentiment was sincere, but mostly my hope was to see Vince take some genuine pride in a job well done, maybe finding that it feels better than lapping up ironic public attention for a train wreck. I'm sure he'll take an interest now that the thread is mostly negative.
28 Apr 2009 — 6:22am
i'm sure he has better things to do. really.
28 Apr 2009 — 6:53am
>Good home page, though :|
Yes, lovely iuse of Arial :-)
28 Apr 2009 — 8:28am
I mean it: for me, Trebuchet is a good design. Human touch but still serious and convenient for screen.
Another thing I like about Trebuchet: lowercase l different from Uppercase I (not very common in sans designs).
I only mentioned Comic Sans because many of us hate it so much, but Trebuchet is a very different stuff. Not every popular font is a bad font, right?
28 Apr 2009 — 8:49am
You guys are missing one valuable point about Trebuchet: It's the narrowest useable sans-serif for the web. Narrower than Tahoma, but not as nice. If space conservation is your thing, and you must use a sans…
28 Apr 2009 — 9:46am
Typophile forums are now a confessional? Sometimes I like to eat the occasional hot dog.
Thanks Dan for bringing it back to utility.
28 Apr 2009 — 11:13am
Sometimes they are confessional without it being intended as such... ;-) I am included in that of course.
28 Apr 2009 — 11:41am
amen
28 Apr 2009 — 12:38pm
I think Trebuchet works really well on TV. It's the typeface I use when I need to set subtitles.
28 Apr 2009 — 1:04pm
It's certainly interesting to look at the bi-level hinted fonts and how well they hold up under modern rendering technologies.
28 Apr 2009 — 2:08pm
Good home page, though :|
Yes, lovely iuse of Arial :-)
Maybe I should have used Trebuchet? Just kidding, that would be really Amateur.
I think Trebuchet works really well on TV. It’s the typeface I use when I need to set subtitles.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA. There you go.
Trebuchet, the thinking mans comic sans.
28 Apr 2009 — 2:19pm
Thanks for removing all doubt.
28 Apr 2009 — 2:49pm
I was surprised to find that a rather handsome all-caps headline was set in Trebuchet the other day. Not sure I'd use the lowercase for anything other than a blog or website but the caps work quite nicely for a titling font.
28 Apr 2009 — 3:05pm
AHAHAHAHAHAHA. There you go.
I don't get it, Höfe.
28 Apr 2009 — 3:35pm
Trebuchet has a lot of good points: an interesting lowercase l, a beautiful g, a good bunch of true italics, it saves space (maybe trees too) without being too compressed, etc.
It's not the best, but for web design is a good choice.
28 Apr 2009 — 4:14pm
>Trebuchet, the thinking mans comic sans.
Ok, I am curious about what do you use.
28 Apr 2009 — 6:25pm
>Ok, I am curious about what do you use.
Like all "very Good Designers", lovely types like this one...
http://typophile.com/node/53499
...unless of course the ID was for a "friend" :-P
28 Apr 2009 — 8:37pm
It was one of my favourite 'stock fonts' in my pre-typophile days.
I think it was the first time I'd seen the 'et' ampersand and I recall that really intrigued me.
28 Apr 2009 — 8:50pm
Like all “very Good Designers”, lovely types like this one...
You like Trebuchet and your mocking me? hahaha fail.
Anyway, I just worked out the thread, cerulean is clearly taking the p*ss. He actually had me going. Good one.
28 Apr 2009 — 9:43pm
>You like Trebuchet and your mocking me? hahaha fail.
I can see you dislike Trebuchet, but you are not answering, Höfe… Please, I really want to know. What fonts do you like and use for screen jobs?
29 Apr 2009 — 1:00am
I like Trebuchet, for all the reasons stated above and more.
Sure, the umlauts are a bit wide, but I rarely set German text so that isn't a great concern to me.
29 Apr 2009 — 2:47am
Anyway, I just worked out the thread, cerulean is clearly taking the p*ss.
I doubt it. And I, personally, would prefer not knowing what gets you going, in case it's something quite distasteful.
29 Apr 2009 — 6:34am
29 Apr 2009 — 8:04am
i remember the first time i took trebuchet seriously was when i had to update some really small ingredient labels for boutique chocolate at my old work, i thouhgt 'gee that tiny 5-point type looks good, then i discovered it was trebuchet, which means it's one i think of as good for really small printed stuff if you need a system font for the job.
anywho...
29 Apr 2009 — 8:46am
I don't hate Trebuchet, like I don't hate cigarettes.
But I've never used either one seriously.
--Me (misquoting Nick Shinn)
29 Apr 2009 — 2:38pm
As a web designer, I look at Trebuchet as the Windows fall-back font for Lucida Grande.
It's a more suitable replacement for headlines than Verdana or Arial. And that's the way it goes on the web.
Ditto: Overlooked. Underused. Niche.
29 Apr 2009 — 2:49pm
I really dislike Trebuchet, I rather prefer Tahoma or Verdana, I don't care about true italics as much as good letterforms.
29 Apr 2009 — 3:08pm
>As a web designer, I look at Trebuchet as the Windows fall-back font for Lucida Grande.
As our 12 year old friend would say - "fail!" :-)
I think Windows has included Lucida Sans Unicode for longer than Apple shipped Lucida Grande? Yet another case of Microsoft copying Apple in advance.
29 Apr 2009 — 6:01pm
>>the Windows fall-back font for Lucida Grande
Sii beat me to the punch, but Lucida Sans/Grande is practically the only typeface that has a native system variant on every Operating system. For Linux, Luxi, although not Lucida, is certainly a very closely related cousin and Lucida Sans also ships standard with Java.
29 Apr 2009 — 6:02pm
Because of this thread, I'm actually going to design a webpage that exclusively uses Trebuchet. How about them Apples, eh?
30 Apr 2009 — 5:09am
"Yet another case of Microsoft copying Apple in advance."
A common misconception among busily entrenching kleptocrats. :-p
"...Lucida Sans/Grande is practically the only typeface that has a native system variant on every Operating system..."
Not surprising, any operating system with native blurry-bot rendering needs a simplified san serif (or ten), so their blurry-bot rendering will not show up, (at the top of your windows at least).
Cheers!
30 Apr 2009 — 6:25am
Do you remember the fonts we had to hint for the first tests for Apple to bid for the next font format on Macintoshes?
Lucida Bright!
I'd type this in Chalkboard if I could.
30 Apr 2009 — 7:51am
How come Lucida Grande looks fantastic on the mac, and Lucida Sans looks average on the PC? is it just a screen-rendering thing or are the designs really that different?
30 Apr 2009 — 9:29am
I think David explained that (in his own special way)
30 Apr 2009 — 2:12pm
I've never liked the g of Trebuchet. Ever. But I'm quite particular about the g.
30 Apr 2009 — 9:01pm
I still quite object to the fact that the endash and hyphen look exactly the same, a clear error.
—
Joe Clark
http://joeclark.org/
1 May 2009 — 4:20am
I MADE THE FIRST EVER BITMAPS OF TAHOMA FOR THE WINDOWS 95 SYSTEM ENGINEERS since Mr Carter delivered Mac Font-tastic Plus negative sidebearing bitmaps. I had to remake them and change some things and compile them into 2.fnt files so they could be usable...so there.... start whinging about Tahoma now
1 May 2009 — 7:44am
Damn you Vince for that Tahoma! I see it everywhere! Totally inappropriately, like on websites that need "Verdana" but are too cheap to purchase the extra pixel widths. How brash and irresponsible!
:)
1 May 2009 — 7:59am
@sii - to be honest, i was confused by his post...