Re: Font Selection Methodology

Subject: Re: Font Selection Methodology
From: Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- jci -dot- com
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 13:17:33 -0500


>>I can pick a font in 10 seconds and produce serviceable, usable, and
clear,
>>though perhaps not elegant, documents. Or I can spend days agonizing over
>>getting the font choice absolutely perfect, and end up not having time to
>>make a last editing pass or two at troublesome, complicated passages,
>>resulting in an unhelpful document with beautiful production values.
>
>Arlen,
>This is begging the issue.

Funny, I thought it *was* the issue.

> I doubt if you (or anyone) can produce a
>document with beautiful production values in 10 seconds as you claim
>here. Leaving that red-herring aside...

Am I *really* having such a bad day that I can't write anything that anyone
understands? Look at that quote. I never said that. The worst I can twist
it into saying is that I can do it in days. What I said was I could pick
the font in 10 seconds. I didn't say that was the end of the project.
(Though I suppose to hear some of the comments made from this thread,
perhaps picking the font *is* all there is to the project, and nothing else
matters. Except page margins, I guess.)

>Example: I have just received a book where the margins have been set
>so that the centre of the booklet (the gutter) isn't wide enough and
>the words in the closest columns are too close to the binding to read.

Isn't it interesting that when I say fonts are one of the lesser worries in
a project, I get comments about design issues unrelated to font selection
handed to me as evidence that I am wrong?

>You are selling the role of typography short. It isn't knowing what
>the history of a typeface is. It is being aware of all the variations
>and having the wherewithal to make an informed choice about the look
>of the beast.

Actually, history *is* a part of typography, and a fascinating part. There
is a *reason* for a particular typeface to come into existence. It is
designed to solve a problem more than it is to salve a designer's ego. If
you know what problems the face was designed to solve, you have a leg up on
knowing how best to use it. You also get a feel for what drawbacks might
come of using it. I didn't mention history idly; it's quite informative.
You can trace the influences down through history from Manutius and Griffo
to Eric Gill, Herman Zapf and Sumner Stone. You can see which fonts have
picked up which attributes of earlier ones, which connect you to other
possible reasons to use them. You can see how improvements in technology
affected the evolution of a face, and see where the next tech will take
you. It's a big help in understanding the why's of a particular font.

>Methinks your knowlege of typography is shallow.

Methinks your knowledge of me isn't deep enough to be measurable this side
of an electron microscope. But that doesn't stop anyone else on this list,
so please don't let it hold you back.

> Mine was until I saw
>how someone who knew what they were doing redid my work. The
>transformation was stunning. I became a believer and I started
>looking into the issue and learned enough to value the contribution.

Then it appears you actually followed at least part of the advice I've
offered. Do what you can, then mark down what you can't to make yourself
better for the next time.

>Bruce, others, and I are taking exception with your position that if
>you don't have the inclination to search for perfection it isn't
>necessary to try to improve the readability/usability of the
>document.

If that's the position you're taking issue with, I wish you well. And when
you've demolished that particular straw man, I'll be happy to discuss my
position with you. It shouldn't take you long so I'll wait. Finished? Good.

You see, my position has nothing whatsoever to do with inclination and
everything to do with time. When the project's clock is ticking, you do the
best you can with what you know. That means take what you know about fonts
and spend a few minutes selecting the font (10 seconds is an acceptable
time, if you feel comfortable with your knowledge) before getting started
collecting and organizing the material for your project. When you have made
the material as clear and concise as you feel you can get it (subject to
the law of diminishing returns) if there's still time on the project clock,
then you go back and revisit the decisions you skimped on earlier.

Take care of business first, then take care of yourself. Project is
complete, so you review. You're not comfortable with the level of skill you
applied to such criteria as font selection? *Now* is the time for you to go
rectify that. Only now, *not* while the project clock is ticking.

> We do think that time should be taken to improve both
>phrasing and form, where and when possible. The two go hand-in-hand.
>In fact, it is both what you do and how you do it. Your, and others,
>ignorring of the partnership does a disservice to the resulting
>document.

It's not an equal partnership. A manual that is 80% of the way to being
accurate is dangerous. One that is 80% of the way to being elegant is still
usable, just clumsy. One that is 100% accurate and 80% elegant is better
than one which is 90% of both. Obviously 100% of both is perfect, but who
has the time to get things perfect?

Time is the limiting factor. We don't work in a vacuum. We have to do what
we can do within a limited period of time. If you always get all the time
you need on your projects, then obviously you don't have to make decisions
like this. To those of us working in the real world, however, these choices
are made every day, every project.

>When well-done, the text should be invisible.

If I had displayed the same attention to your statements that you and
others have been paying to mine, I would here begin a lengthy digression by
pointing out that invisible text could not be read. But I won't write that
long digression. I believe that what you're getting at is that the style
applied to the text is not noticed. (And since I seem to get misunderstood
a lot, let me break the flow here to say that the aforementioned style
includes, but is not limited to, kerning, leading, ligatures, margins,
colors, x-height, bowls, counters, line-height and serifs.) And in that
respect, you're right. It's like the referee at a sporting event -- if he
does his job well, he's never noticed.

> If you are aware of the
>typographic elements in play, the typographer who composed the
>document has failed.

Or you're someone like me, who looks for those kind of things, to see what
I can learn.

Have fun,
Arlen
Chief Managing Director In Charge, Department of Redundancy Department
DNRC 224

Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- JCI -dot- Com
----------------------------------------------
In God we trust; all others must provide data.
----------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed are mine and mine alone.
If JCI had an opinion on this, they'd hire someone else to deliver it.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Free copy of ARTS PDF Tools when you register for the PDF
Conference by April 30. Leading-Edge Practices for Enterprise
& Government, June 3-5, Bethesda,MD. www.PDFConference.com

Are you using Doc-to-Help or ForeHelp? Switch to RoboHelp for Word for $249
or to RoboHelp Office for only $499. Get the PC Magazine five-star rated
Help authoring tool for less! Go to http://www.ehelp.com/techwr

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.



Follow-Ups:

Previous by Author: Re: Font Selection Methodology
Next by Author: Re: Standards wrt paper and standards
Previous by Thread: Re: Font Selection Methodology
Next by Thread: Re: Font Selection Methodology (apology)


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads