page 42

The Latest Reform.

Last month, in reference to the point system, we wrote: « One reform only will then remain—to make the width of every character to even points. » Our American exchanges, since to hand, show that the first step has been taken in this direction; and we do not hesitate to say that the time is not very distant when every fount, plain or ornamental, will come in accurately to pica, as easily as a combination border. The annoyance arising from discrepant bodies, about which so much agitation has taken place, is insignificant compared with the trouble which arises in justification of lines, through the width of the several characters bearing no proportion either to a pica standard or the body of the type. In another page we quote the patentees' article describing the new style, and we may add, that having gone carefully into the subject, we endorse all that is said as to the advantage of the new method. Any one who has ever set table work must have noticed how much more rapidly the figure columns are composed than those of the text; and we consider that the estimate of the inventors, that twenty-five per cent. is saved in time of composition, is under rather than over the mark.

Let us consider some of the present anomalies. Figures are to an en body, and space accurately with em and en quads. The comma, which is always used with figures in tabular work, is (generally) just half the width, and with the middle space, justifies correctly. But the £ is on a body of two-thirds of the em—in conjunction with the comma, an incommeasurable fraction of the em. The £, to work harmoniously with figures and commas, should either be ½ or ¾ of the em. The beautiful English brevier in which Typo is set, is a particularly troublesome letter in this particular. We have a large fount, to which we have added from time to time. The first portion had the comma to the usual thickness of one-fourth of the body—the last addition, consisting of 500lb, had the comma to a nondescript thickness, something less than a thick space, the face and nick being the same as before. To keep them apart is out of the question, and since they have been mixed, it is impossible to set a column of figures straight without examining every comma that is used. Equally absurd is the fashion, which has been much exaggerated of late years, of making the apostrophe smaller and thinner than the comma. We have a long primer, in which the comma is ¼ of the em in width, and the apostrophe about ⅙, and slight in proportion. The two characters should be exactly alike, varying only in position. When brought into close juxtaposition, as in a short quotation like "No," the effect is often very ridiculous.

Many of the characters in an ordinary fount are anomalous in thickness, and have no equivalent in any single space or combination of spaces. Such are the t, s, e, z, &c. The n is generally narrower than the space to which it gives its name. The typefounders denounce the comps who bend spaces; but the fault lies elsewhere. In many cases there is no other alternative but to cut brevier or nonpareil spaces out of paper—as we had to do not many days ago in some tabular work in nonpareil where there was only one space in each line for justification. A hair-space would not go in, and a piece of stout paper had to fill the place.

The spaces themselves are anomalous. From the em to the middle, they bear a fixed proportion to the body: 1, ½, ⅓, ¼. Below this all is confusion. The thin space is sometimes ⅕, sometimes ⅙, sometimes quite a random thickness. The hair-space may be any thickness, and of late years has been gradually thickening to an extraordinary degree. We have founts of two-line great primer in which it is nearly a ¼ pica.

Some of the old landmarks disappear in the new system. Width is regulated by « units, » and the fixed measurement of the present scale are replaced by relative measures. Thus the thick space and en space of a full-faced fount are wider than those of a condensed letter. The spaces no longer relate directly to their own body-fount, but to pica, and no matter what size the type may be, if the measure is set to pica, the justification will be exact. This more than makes up for the abandonment of the fixed points of the present system.

It is noticeable that the time-honored en figure body has quite disappeared from the new scheme. Let us take the four sizes of nonpareil shown in the table. The present width of nonpareil figures is 3 points. In the most condensed nonpareil in the table it is ⅗ 0/6 5, and in the wider faces 4, 4/2 5/5; 5, and 44/5 respectively. These fractions may appear very unmanageable; but they have the advantage of being systematic and corresponding with the spaces, and come out right at the end of the line. In an ordinary fount, figures excepted, there is no system, and the proportions are incommeasurable. We think the new system is defective in giving fractions a fuller body than figures, and we see no mention of half-fractions in the scheme. The plan has also this objection, both from a printers' and founders' point of view, that all « peculiars »—mathematical signs, superiors, &c., now used interchangeably, will require to be cast specially for each fount of varying width. Thus, if a printer had 11-unit nonpareil and 12-unit accessories, it would throw all the system into confusion. This is a decided disadvantage.

There is an evident gain in the matter of legibility. The only specimens before us are in the old-style character, which we thoroughly dislike, but it is clearer reading than the ordinary old-style. In this respect it differs from the letters designed four or five years ago to secure this very object by M. Motteroz, who only succeeded in producing some hideous results. A new feature also is the character of the italic. The letters are precisely the thickness of the corresponding sorts in the roman, but have none of the cursive style of ordinary italic lower-case. They are just roman characters sloped, and the effect is very peculiar, though not unpleasing.

One more reform might have been introduced—the conforming of the small caps to the lower-case. This would have saved the cutting of special punches for small cap o, s, v, w, x, and z. Small caps are at present a nuisance—neither one thing nor another. A few years ago they were so like the lower-case that they were always getting mixed: Oo Ss Vv. Latterly, they have in some cases grown nearly to the size of the caps, and get mixed with them, as in the following example in nonpareil: oO wW. This is worse, as for one of the chief purposes of small caps—that of catch-lines in display—they are useless. They ought to correspond precisely with lower-case. We should then need no extra nick, and the mark « l.c. » would no longer have to be sprinkled over the proofs by the reader.

We are not sure that the system, though in its own way unexceptionable, is the best possible. We would like to see the proportions one-thirteenth, one-seventh, &c., thrown out altogether. By dividing the point, say, by four, and starting with a universal unit of 1/48 (or if necessary 1/96) pica, the whole process would be reduced to one of simple addition, which is, to our mind, the only sound basis on which type proportions can be fixed. The least mixing of spaces of the new system would introduce even worse confusion than there is at present; under the system we suggest, it would be harmless, and the characters and spaces of each fount would have a fixed relation to every other. It would not then be necessary to have more than one series of « peculiars » to each size.

A good beginning has been made; but we hope to see the system extended to every fount, no matter what its face may be. It would be especially useful in case of letters like the « Relievo, » « Roman Scroll, » and « Arboret, » designed to work in combination with borders, and could be successfully carried out without distorting the letters in any degree.

We have but one more remark to make in conclusion. This new scheme will make more pressing than ever the necessity for a systematic nick, as advocated in our article on page 18 of the present volume.