Article View: comp.lang.postscript
Article #5760Re: Postscript Font Scaling & Reduction
From: Michael Wang
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 02:04
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 02:04
59 lines
3573 bytes
3573 bytes
ab@nova.cc.purdue.edu (Allen B) writes: >zisk@adobe.com (Stephen Zisk) writes: >> 4.) The reasons for different designs at different sizes in hot type >> (and Multiple Master Fonts) are complex and subtle: > >As far as I've seen, in most cases it was for mechanical >reasons (as the poster said). Trouble is, some people >expect it now. "Hysterical raisins." :-) I don't believe having different designs at different point sizes was done for mostly mechanical reasons. There are some definite readability and legability issues involved with optical scaling. While typeface readability and legability is still mostly guesswork rather than a science, there are areas where we do have good information. And one of those areas is how the size of the type affects r&l. For reading long passages of text, there is a small range of sizes that gives the best balance between reading speed and reading comprehension. What the "optimum" size is for a particular face may be open to debate, but the general concept holds true. If it wasn't then everything would be printed at 6 point and we could save millions of trees a year. As the point size gets smaller than this optimum size, reading comprehension begins to suffer because it becomes more difficult to discern individual words and letters. Conversely, as the point size gets larger, reading speed suffers since instead of reading groups of words at a time, you start to focus on individual words or letters. To compensate for these problems, type designers in the past created slightly different designs for different point sizes. At smaller sizes, generally the x-height was enlarged, contrast between strokes decreased, width of the various letters increased slightly and the letterspacing was looser. At larger sizes, the opposite was done. The effect of all these changes was to try and make those sizes more readable. For those technical minded people, another way of thinking about this problem is to pretend that our reading "visual acuity" can be plotted in the shape of a Gaussian curve with visual acuity being the y-axis and point size the x-axis. At the middle of the curve, we have our "optimum" point size for reading. As the point size decreases, we slip down the left side of the curve and reading comprehension, or overall visual acuity, suffers. By making the changes mentioned above, we make the typeface at that size appear "bigger" and so we move slightly back towards the middle, improving comprehension. Similiarly, as the point size gets larger, we slip down the right side of the curve, decreasing the reading speed. If we tweak the face to appear "smaller" at that size, we shift back towards the middle again. With photo typesetting and now digital typesetting, you can look at stuff at a small size that has been linerally scaled from a single design and think it looks pretty readable. What you don't realize, unless you have had experience in this area, is that with optical sizing, things can look even better. -- Michael Wang mmwang@mv.us.adobe.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Nov20.020424.5847@adobe.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!olivea!hal.com!decwrl!adobe!mmwangReferences:
<zisk-191192111648@macne006.boston.us.adobe.com> <BxzG5A.519@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!olivea!hal.com!decwrl!adobe!mmwang From: mmwang@adobe.com (Michael Wang) Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: Postscript Font Scaling & Reduction Message-ID: <1992Nov20.020424.5847@adobe.com> Date: 20 Nov 92 02:04:24 GMT References: <zisk-191192111648@macne006.boston.us.adobe.com> <BxzG5A.519@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> Sender: usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS) Distribution: na Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated Lines: 59