Why shouldn't I use Verdana or Arial in my logo?

One of the things guaranteed to make my blood pressure soar is when I see logos that have been created using Arial, Verdana, Comic Sans or Brush Script. Why? Because the text your logo is created in is as important, if not more, than the icon that sits alongside it.

The way your logo is set is called your logotype - the font/ shape of the word that denotes your logo. A well constructed logotype won't be an afterthought, plonked alongside a pretty shape; it will be a well planned, well executed and beautifully crafted piece of typography.

So what's wrong with the Terrible Four (as we shall call them from now on)? Apart from Brush Script which is horribly dated, nothing, as fonts in their own right. You'll find that you have to use them when sending emails, you'll also need to use them on your website. They're standard fonts, they're reliable, and that is where the problem lies.

You shouldn't be retyping your logotype every time you use it: you should be inserting a file (a tif, an EPS or a JPEG usually). So there is no need to use a font that everyone has.

Secondly, it's because these fonts are so common that they lack the distinction and personality that your logotype needs. A well planned logo will use fonts that say the right things about your business. The font will communicate all those messages that you want to get across - whether that's approachability, tradition or exclusivity. The terrible four simply don't have the personality to do that.

Thirdly, and most importantly: open your mind! There are literally thousands of fonts out there. We have 2417 alone just in our studio. That's before you take into account those you can download for free or a small (or large, depending on how desirable the font) on the internet. Why, when there is that much choice out there, would you limit yourself to a bog standard font that does nothing for you?

But what's your view on this? Does your logo use a font that's a part of the Terrible Four?