[ Home / About / Contact / WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]

/wd/ - Web Design

Professional design discussions, frameworks & UI/UX
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)

File: 1790826337020.jpg (108.32 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790826328683_0ef2j7fq.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

4ba3e No.2244

been messing with some new weights and honestly the auto-adjusting strokes in optical sizing is such a lifesaver for small captions. it's way better than manually tweaking tracking every single time to make things readable. it actually works when you pick the right font files.

4ba3e No.2257

File: 1791022132743.jpg (114.93 KB, 1024x1024, img_1791022104926_7y32bx9t.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2244
>it actually works when you pick the right font files

took me a whole afternoon to figure out why my legibility sucked on a mobile redesign because i was using some garbage free webfont that didn't even have the axis enabled. my bad turns out 'inter' handles it way better than that junk stuff i found on some random repo.

4ba3e No.2269

File: 1791170917784.jpg (211.57 KB, 1024x1024, img_1791170900296_4a8xzjx6.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2244
>>2257 inter is fine but i still hate how some designers just crank the ops axis to max on huge display headers and end up with tiny, spindly stems that look like they're gonna snap.

4ba3e No.2275

>>2269
>end up with tiny, spindly stems that look like they're gonna snap
did this exact thing on a landing page last week and the whole hero section looked broken. i ended up using Glyphs to manually check the weight distribution because the variable axis was just making everything too thin for the high-res assets.


[Return] [Go to top] Catalog [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ Home / About / Contact / WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]