The Crystal Goblet
Achieving
The Crystal Goblet by Beatrice Warde
Legibility by Rolf F. Rehe
I
magine that you have before you a flagon of wine. You may choose your own favourite vintage for this imaginary demonstration, so that it be a deep shimmering crimson in colour. You have two goblets before you. One is of solid gold, wrought in the most exquisite patterns. The other is of crystalclear glass, thin as a bubble, and as transparent. Pour and drink; and according to your choice of goblet, I shall know whether or not you are a connoisseur of wine. For if you have no feelings about wine one way or the other, you will want the sensation of drinking the stuff out of a vessel that may have cost thousands of pounds; but if you are a member of that vanishing tribe, the amateurs of fine vintages, you will choose the crystal, because everything about it is calculated to reveal rather than hide the beautiful thing which it was meant to contain. 1
How the Eye Perceives the Printed Word When reading, the eye sweeps along the line of print in so-called saccadic jumps. It pauses quickly (for about a second) at regular intervals, and it is during that short pause or fixation that actual perception of words takes place. After the short pause, the eye proceeds with another saccadic movement, then pauses again to perceive and comprehend the words. Occasionally, the eye might move back on the line to reread what might not have been comprehended adequately the first time. Return moves are termed “regressions.” One study found that the proportion of time taken by eye movements varies with comprehension demands of the reading situation. Perception time usually involved 92–94% of reading time.
Bear with me in this long-winded and fragrant metaphor; for you will find that almost all the virtues of the perfect wine-glass have a parallel in typography. There is the long, thin stem that obviates fingerprints on the bowl. Why? Because no cloud must come between your eyes and the fiery heart of the liquid. Are not the margins on book pages similarly meant to obviate the necessity of fingering the type-page?
2
Again: the glass is colourless or at the most only faintly tinged in the bowl, because the connoisseur judges wine partly by its colour and is impatient of anything that alters it. There are a thousand mannerisms in typography that are as impudent and arbitrary as putting port in tumblers of red or green glass! When a goblet has a base that looks too small for security, it does not matter how cleverly it is weighted; you feel nervous lest it should tip over. There are ways of setting lines of type which may work well enough, and yet keep the reader subconsciously worried by the fear of ‘doubling’ lines, reading three words as one, and so forth.
3
Now the man who first chose glass instead of clay or metal to hold his wine was a ‘modernist’ in the sense in which I am going to use that term. That is, the first thing he asked of his particular object was not ‘How should it look?’ but ‘What must it do?’ and to that extent all good typography is modernist. Wine is so strange and potent a thing that it has been used in the central ritual of religion in one place and time, and attacked by a virago with a hatchet in another. There is only one thing in the world that is capable of stirring and altering men’s minds to the same extent, and that is the coherent expression of thought. That is man’s chief miracle, unique to man. There is no ‘explanation’ whatever of the fact that I can make arbitrary sounds which will lead a total stranger to think my own thought. It is sheer magic that I should be able to hold a one-sided conversation by means of black marks on paper with an unknown person half-way across the world. Talking, broadcasting, writing, and printing are all quite literally forms of thought transference, and it is the ability and eagerness to transfer and receive the contents of the mind that is almost alone responsible for human civilization.
4
The Need for a Functional Typography Most of the scribes of medieval Europe were monks. For them, producing books was a work of art, an attempt to please God with beautiful lettering. Concern for communication was generally a secondary issue. When Johannes Gutenberg, invented moveable type and thus industrialized book production, he copied, in his first type designs, the hand lettering of scribes. The justified line, with its miraculously even word spacing, was achieved with the aid of a large number of ligature letters and abbreviations, marking the shortened words with a horizontal bar above the letters.
Gradually, especially in the twentieth century, a new situation evolved. The level of education rose dramatically, and much more information was being transmitted. Now, reading speed and comprehension have become important factors in the communication process. Not all the print communication produced —in fact, only a small amount—can be absorbed by the average reader. Typography emerged as a functional aspect of print communication.
If you agree with this, you will agree with my one main idea, i.e. that the most important thing about printing is that it conveys thought, ideas, images, from one mind to other minds. This statement is what you might call the front door of the science of typography. Within lie hundreds of rooms; but unless you start by assuming that printing is meant to convey specific and coherent ideas, it is very easy to find yourself in the wrong house altogether.
5
Before asking what this statement leads to, let us see what it does not necessarily lead to. If books are printed in order to be read, we must distinguish readability from what the optician would call legibility.
6
Scientific Investigation of Typography At about the turn of the twentieth century, an important factor contributing to the development of a new, functioning typography appeared—the scientific investigation of typographic legibility. Psychologists studied the ways by which printed type is perceived, and what arrangements and forms of type provide maximum legibility. The first serious investigation of legibility is thought to have begun in 1878, by Professor Emile Javal of the University of Paris. Javal tried to establish the
legibility of individual letters of the alphabet by distance tests and visibility trials. In the years following, sporadic research was conducted, but concentrated research into legibility on a broader scale evolved in the years around 1920. The areas investigated mainly concern the problem of increasing reading speed and comprehension; that is, finding the typographic arrangement that best facilitates these factors, and finding such typographic variables that please the eye and achieve reader attention and response.
A page set in 14 -pt Bold Sans is, according to the laboratory tests, more ‘legible’ than one set in 11-pt Baskerville. A public speaker is more ‘audible’ in that sense when he bellows. But a good speaking voice is one which is inaudible as a voice. It is the transparent goblet again! I need not warn you that if you begin listening to the inflections and speaking rhythms of a voice from a platform, you are falling asleep. When you listen to a song in a language you do not understand, part of your mind actually does fall asleep, leaving your quite separate aesthetic sensibilities to enjoy themselves unimpeded by your reasoning faculties. The fine arts do that; but that is not the purpose of printing. Type well used is invisible as type, just as the perfect talking voice is the unnoticed vehicle for the transmission of words, ideas.
7
8
The Typographer as Mass Communicator Only a few typographic designers have taken advantage of available research findings in legibility. A frequent complaint by researchers is that their findings have not been widely applied in the design of typographic communications. Part of the problem stems from the fact that most research results have been published in scientific journals, usually in a vernacular not easily understood by the typographer. In a mass-media system, the typographer is usually a member of the encoding team. He stands
between the original source of the message and the channel (for the purposes of this discussion, the printed page) that will carry the message to an audience. He has considerable control over the coding process by selecting typefaces and type sizes and by determining the typographic arrangement of the message. He should be concerned with the perception of his message, the attention it can elicit, the mood it creates, its legibility and degree of comprehension, and with maintaining the reader’s attention after it has been attained initially as well
as a high degree of reader recall. He is, in short, no longer a designer of aesthetic printing or simply an artist or craftsman. The typographer of today is a mass communicator, playing an important role in the mass-media system. Typographic message packaging has become an important determinant of whether a print communication is selected and read — and read completely.
9
The Methods of Measuring Legibility Speed of perception — This is measured by short-exposure technique. Printed matter is briefly exposed to a subject by a tachistoscope, a special instrument designed for this purpose. This method has been applied primarily in experiments investigating the legibility of individual letters and symbols. Perceptibility at a distance — This measures the distance from which letters and symbols may be perceived. This method has also been applied in investigations into the legibility of individual letters and symbols and has been used to test the legibility of posters, road signs, etc.
Perceptibility at peripheral vision — This investigates the horizontal distance from which print can be perceived and the distance by which typographic matter can still be recognized. Visibility method — This employs a visibility meter, a set of filters through which the subject views printed material. The density of the filter provides the measurement of perception. The method has been applied primarily for studies of individual letters and symbols. Reflex-blink technique — With this method, the reader’s frequency of blinking is counted, either manually or photographic-electronically. Poor legibility of type will result in increased blinking.
Rate-of-work technique — This measures reading speed, such as amount of reading within a given time limit, or time of reading for a given amount of text. Comprehension checks after the reading measure accuracy of reading in this method. It is perhaps the best method of measurement available, and it is the most frequently employed method. Measurement of eye movements — This method provides good clues to the understanding of legibility factors in typography and information such as why a certain typographic arrangement is perceived positively or negatively by showing the fixation pauses, their duration, and the regressions. Eye movements are recorded photographically or electronically. Fatigue in reading — This has been investigated extensively, but research has not provided significant clues to legibility. One study has shown that readers can sustain several hours of uninterrupted reading without significant signs of fatigue.
We may say, therefore, that printing may be delightful for many reasons, but that it is important, first and foremost, as a means of doing something. That is why it is mischievous to call any printed piece a work of art, especially fine art: because that would imply that its first purpose was to exist as an expression of beauty for its own sake and for the delectation of the senses. Calligraphy can almost be considered a fine art nowadays, because its primary economic and educational purpose has been taken away; but printing in English will not qualify as an art until the present English language no longer conveys ideas to future generations, and until printing itself hands its usefulness to some yet unimagined successor.
10
There is no end to the maze of practices in typography, and this idea of printing as a conveyor is, at least in the minds of all the great typographers with whom I have had the privilege of talking, the one clue that can guide you through the maze. Without this essential humility of mind, I have seen ardent designers go more hopelessly wrong, make more ludicrous mistakes out of an excessive enthusiasm, than I could have thought possible. And with this clue, this purposiveness in the back of your mind, it is possible to do the most unheard-of things, and find that they justify you triumphantly. It is not a waste of time to go to the simple fundamentals and reason from them. In the flurry of your individual problems, I think you will not mind spending half an hour on one broad and simple set of ideas involving abstract principles.
11
I once was talking to a man who designed a very pleasing advertising type which undoubtedly all of you have used. I said something about what artists think about a certain problem, and he replied with a beautiful gesture: ‘Ah, madam, we artists do not think—we feel!’ That same day I quoted that remark to another designer of my acquaintance, and he, being less poetically inclined, murmured: ‘I’m not feeling very well today, I think!’ He was right, he did think; he was the thinking sort; and that is why he is not so good a painter, and to my mind ten times better as a typographer and type designer than the man who instinctively avoided anything as coherent as a reason. I always suspect the typographic enthusiast who takes a printed page from a book and frames it to hang on the wall, for I believe that in order to gratify a sensory delight he has mutilated something infinitely more important.
12
I remember that T.M. Cleland, the famous American typographer, once showed me a very beautiful layout for a Cadillac booklet involving decorations in colour. He did not have the actual text to work with in drawing up his specimen pages, so he had set the lines in Latin. This was not only for the reason that you will all think of; if you have seen the old typefoundries’ famous Quousque Tandem copy (i.e. that Latin has few descenders and thus gives a remarkably even line). No, he told me that originally he had set up the dullest ‘wording’ that he could find (I dare say it was from Hansard), and yet he discovered that the man to whom he submitted it would start reading and making comments on the text. I made some remark on the mentality of Boards of Directors, but Mr Cleland said, ‘No: you’re wrong; if the reader had not been practically forced to read—if he had not seen those words suddenly imbued with glamour and significance —then the layout would have been a failure. Setting it in Italian or Latin is only an easy way of saying “This is not the text as it will appear”.’ 13
Let me start my specific conclusions with book typography, because that contains all the fundamentals, and then go on to a few points about advertising. The book typographer has the job of erecting a window between the reader inside the room and that landscape which is the author’s words. He may put up a stained-glass window of marvellous beauty, but a failure as a window; that is, he may use some rich superb type like text gothic that is something to be looked at, not through. Or he may work in what I call transparent or invisible typography. I have a book at home, of which I have no visual recollection whatever as far as its typography goes; when I think of it, all I see is the Three Musketeers and their comrades swaggering up and down the streets of Paris.
14
The third type of window is one in which the glass is broken into relatively small leaded panes; and this corresponds to what is called ‘fine printing’ today, in that you are at least conscious that there is a window there, and that someone has enjoyed building it. That is not objectionable, because of a very important fact which has to do with the psychology of the subconscious mind. That is that the mental eye focuses through type and not upon it. The type which, through any arbitrary warping of design or excess of ‘colour’, gets in the way of the mental picture to be conveyed, is a bad type. Our subconsciousness is always afraid of blunders (which illogical setting, tight spacing and too-wide unleaded lines can trick us into), of boredom, and of officiousness. The running headline that keeps shouting at us, the line that looks like one long word, the capitals jammed together without hair-spaces — these mean subconscious squinting and loss of mental focus.
15
Writing Style and Typography One study investigated the interaction of readability (style of writing) and typographic legibility. It compared a news story in four versions: 1) long sentences and few paragraphs 2) long sentences and frequent paragraphs 3) short sentences and few paragraphs 4) short sentences and frequent paragraphs. The intent was to show that readability (application of short sentences) supported by frequent paragraphs that increase the white space within the columns improves the legibility of the news story. Tests supported the hypothesis. It was also demonstrated that white space around or within the text block had a higher impact than readability improvements.
16
Legibility of Individual Letters The width of individual letters contributes to legibility. Condensed type designs are somewhat more difficult to read than those that are moderately extended. When selected letters of “normal width” alphabet were slightly extended, their legibility increased. To some extent, the space around individual letters influences legibility. Additionally, the white space within letters (such as in o, e, c, etc.) influences their recognition. These letters, due to their similar shape, are often misread, and the white space within and around them helps to differentiate them. Fine strokes of individual letters, a common feature in both Modern and Old Style Roman, tend to reduce legibility of individual letters by also reducing their differentiation value. Letters with fine strokes may be easily confused with other letters of similar
shape, leading to reading errors. The words “light” and “fight” provide an example of possible errors based on the wrong perception of individual key letters. Letters of poor legibility have a marked tendency to be misread. The right half of individual letters is most significant for letter recognition. Similarly, the upper halves of letters provide better cues for recognition. In general, letters with specific differentiation are more easily recognized than letters without such differentiation. This finding applies to both serif and sans serif typefaces. The variables influencing legibility of individual letters, then, are the complexity of letter outline, stroke width, heaviness, weight of hairlines, space within and around the letter, and differentiating letter features.
Type Size Since one initial decision in typographic design concerns size of text type, it is not surprising that a large number of studies have investigated type sizes most beneficial to legibility. A definition of the most legible type size has been hampered by the fact that x-heights for individual typefaces differ greatly. Sizes of typefaces come from the metal body on which the letter is cast, and which always must be accurate “to the point.” Heights of individual typefaces on a uniform body (measured by the lowercase x and therefore called “x-height”) might vary considerably and will in many cases. Some 8 point typefaces may appear as large as a 10 point size of a different type design, while some 10 point type sizes may consist of a relatively small type design, giving it the appearance of a smaller type size.
17
Serif or Sans Serif Type?
Research findings in optimal text type sizes have to be seen in light of the x-height problem. The most legible type sizes appear to be 9, 10, II, or 12 point. The range of sizes stems from the differences in x-height. Larger type sizes increase the number of fixations since they take up more space both vertically and horizontally. Smaller type sizes simply reduce visibility of the type and hamper all-important word recognition. Larger sizes force readers to perceive words in sections, rather than as a whole, and consequently slow down reading speed. In general, readers tend to prefer moderate type sizes and small amounts of leading.
One of the most often asked questions concerns the comparative legibility of sans serif versus serif typeface designs. Numerous studies have investigated that problem, most always without finding a significantly valuable answer. One extensive study suggests that “the neurological structure of the human visual system benefits from serifs in the preservation of the main features of letters.” It seems that since words are perceived by their outline shape, single letters with serifs, which have a more distinctive outline shape over sans serif letters, may also be more easily perceptible than are sans serif letters. These findings do not signal the disappearance of sans serif typefaces. For one, the legibility differences between the two type categories, although scientifically significant, are often of a minimal nature. Secondly, the typeface design needs to relate to and support the “tone” of the message.
Lowercase or Uppercase Typography Words are perceived by their specific word-shape outline. Once the outline of the words has been perceived and stored in memory, future recognition of the word takes place without letter-by-letter deciphering. Words set in all caps do not provide specific word-shape outlines since they produce an oblong, uniform word shape. No cues can be perceived by the eye, and a time-consuming deciphering of the word, letter by letter, is necessary. Further evidence for this process was supplied when one researcher found that more reading errors were made in reading lowercase words than words set in all caps, indicating that all caps words are read letter by letter, while lowercase words are not.
18
Kinds of Type Line Width Line width is another important contributor to legibility of continuously running text. Although it will be discussed as an independent factor for the time being, it is dependent on both type size, amount of leading, and, in a marginal context, on the typeface. For optimal type sizes of 9, 10, 11, and 12 point, about ten to twelve words per line seem to be most comforting to the eye. Less efficient reading will occur with very long and very short lines. Difficulties in reading short lines is attributed to an inability of the eye to make maximum use of horizontal perceptual cues. Difficult perception of very wide lines seems to come from inaccuracies and difficulties in relocating the beginning of each new line. The majority of readers found the most legible line width also to be pleasing to the eye. In general, readers prefer a moderate line width.
Leading The third major factor contributing to legibility of text matter, the amount of leading, also has been investigated extensively. The typeface, of course, influences the amount of leading necessary, and different typefaces require varying amounts of leading. Unleaded material is read relatively slowly, and reading rate increases with additional leading. For optimal sizes of 9, 10, 11, and 12 point, the most beneficial amount of leading ranges from 1 to 4 points, depending on the individual typeface used.
Heaviness of individual letters provides another important clue to legibility. The ideal text type should be medium, not too heavy, nor too light. A typeface that is too heavy (bold) tends to tire the eye easily. On the other hand, a typeface of a very light design provides a rather poor differentiation from the paper background and reduces legibility. The “brightness contrast,� the perceived blackness of type against the brightness of the paper background, constitutes an important determinant of legibility. Italic type, traditionally considered the superior mode of emphasis in text matter, is actually disliked by readers. Italics tend to slow down the reading speed. Application of italics, when compared to roman, reduced reading speed by about fourteen to sixteen words per minute. Boldface, then, is more legible than italic, but it should be applied only in limited amounts, since it tires the eye easily.
19 These methods of measurement can provide data on the legibility of print; however, it needs to be pointed out that all methods are only relatively accurate, since measurement of perception includes a variety of uncontrolled factors. The results are best seen as aiding factors in typographic design and not as automatic guarantors of maximum legibility. But applied with care, research results in the form of recommendations and proposals may aid the typographic designer in creating a more effective mode of typographic communication. The majority of studies consist of univariate analysis; that is, only one typographic variable was investigated at a time. But obviously, in typography, a variety of variables interact. As a rule, isolated research findings may be applied with good results, but it is suggested that research findings be combined, when possible. For instance, type size, line width, and leading should always be considered together since these variables greatly interrelate.
And if what I have said is true of book printing, even of the most exquisite limited editions, it is fifty times more obvious in advertising, where the one and only justification for the purchase of space is that you are conveying a message—that you are implanting a desire, straight into the mind of the reader. It is tragically easy to throw away half the reader-interest of an advertisement by setting the simple and compelling argument in a face which is uncomfortably alien to the classic reasonableness of the book-face.
20
Get attention as you will by your headline, and make any pretty type pictures you like if you are sure that the copy is useless as a means of selling goods; but if you are happy enough to have really good copy to work with, I beg you to remember that thousands of people pay hard-earned money for the privilege of reading quietly set book-pages, and that only your wildest ingenuity can stop people from reading a really interesting text. 21
Printing demands a humility of mind, for the lack of which many of the fine arts are even now floundering in self-conscious and maudlin experiments. There is nothing simple or dull in achieving the transparent page. Vulgar ostentation is twice as easy as discipline. When you realise that ugly typography never effaces itself; you will be able to capture beauty as the wise men capture happiness by aiming at something else. The ‘stunt typographer’ learns the fickleness of rich men who hate to read. Not for them are long breaths held over serif and kern, they will not appreciate your splitting of hair-spaces. Nobody (save the other craftsmen) will appreciate half your skill. But you may spend endless years of happy experiment in devising that crystalline goblet which is worthy to hold the vintage of the human mind. 22
Conclusion and Outlook In what direction should legibility research and application of research findings go? First of all, univariate research, that is, investigation of individual typographic variables, needs to be increased and broadened. Individual research findings are the tile pieces of the mosaic of better legibility. Second, the interaction of various legibility findings needs to be investigated on a broader scale. Testing of texts that apply new research findings, compared with texts that use conventional typographic elements, may present valuable results. Third, the methods of measuring legibility remain in need of improvement. Methods of subject selection and pre-screening, and a tight experimental control of the experimental situation are major factors requiring refinement. The research presented here in the form of recommendations is, in general, supported by a number of research findings— but they are still few in numbers. A reasonable case for their application can be made. Yet individual judgments, dependent on the specific typographic situation, will be necessary.
23