Kupferschrift.de Website Review

I have long been thinking about ways to better as*ess the quality of different typefaces. With so many to choose from, students, graphic designers, even laypeople, often have to compare fonts to find the fitting ones for their work. But how should one do that? Leaving mere taste aside, what are some concrete criteria for good quality typefaces?. The following is a work-in-progress draft. It currently includs point both for users of type as well as designers of typefaces. I may split this up in future versions of this list but it’s also very educational for users to learn about what designers of type have to points placed at optimal positions, optimal balance of off-curve points, no superfluous on-curve points) – even st*oke thickness fitting the design of the typeface – similar detailing across characters (treatment of related serifs, bowls, extenders) – optical compensation (larger rounds, overshoots, thinning of st*okes at joints, optical middle, making verticals thicker etc) – harmonious spacing that fits the design (fitting the size of counters, optically even space between all glyphs, not too tight or – individual spacing adjustment of tricky letter combinations where needed (= kerning; high number of kerning pairs may indicate spacing – wordspace that fits proportions of the design (many low-quality free fonts forget to even set the wordspace) – fitting design of auxiliary characters like punctuation, numerals, currency symbols etc. – appropriate vertical dimensions (no clipping, no overlapping extenders when set solid, not too much line spacing) – functioning OpenType features, if included, that follow the OT-specifications – basic, if only automatic, hinting for reasonable rendering on Windows systems – related styles that fit well together as a family (share design details and proportions; just one single weight makes a typeface less suitable for body copy and small sizes if they say so; is it working well in large sizes and headlines as is?)