Legible or not that is the question? by maya littman

Legible or not? that is the question.

MA CTM Essay/Unit 1.2 Maya Littman

ascender height

ascender shoulder cap-height

cross stroke

x height

thin thick crossbar

bracket

descender

counters

bowl

Illustrated by Maya Littman reference taken from ‘primer type’ John Kane, ‘type & typography’ Phil Baines & Andrew Haslam and ‘designing for legibility’ Sofie Beier.

tail

foot serif

head serif

This essay will research the question: ‘can we define legibility of a typeface or not?’ Phil Baines points out that ‘it is possible to set a legible face in an readable way’, arguing that the moment you are able to ‘recognize the letters’ they are legible. (Baines, Haslam, 2002, p. 105). As a designer and typographer, I would like to analyze and understand whether we have an embedded unconscious record that helps us to recognize letters. Does the habit of a typeface facilitate optimal legibility and would it therefore be the most legible? I would like to answer this question and develop it further in my final major project by examining the relationship of legibility and the printed word for the dyslexic reader. Most of our embedded memories tend to relate to the errors and the distortion of a typeface, rather than what is legible. For instance, Zuzana Zicko believes that ‘Typefaces are not intrinsically legible. Rather, it is the reader’s familiarity with faces that accounts for their legibility’ (Licko, 1990 p.12). There are many factors affecting the legibility of a typeface, such as how it is presented: under difficult reading conditions, or small point sizes and the different ways the type is reproduced onto the paper. In print; newspaper, books, billboards and signs need to be created in a specific way to function at their very best. Also, emotional attachment to the type itself influences its legibility. To understand the topic of legibility in its complexity we have to define the various areas of expertise. I am only going to explore a few scientific facts as well as the embedded research and discoveries that fellow designers have undertaken over the years. The research into continuous reading specifically the relationship between the leading, the point size and

lowercase UPPERCASE lowercase lowercase UPPERCASE

Uppercase is to lowercase.In a comparison of the same point size, uppercase letters tend to perform better than lowercase letters when read from a distance and when blurred. Illustrated with Akzidenz-Grotesk Std based on Sofie Beier illustration.

UPPERCASE

lowercase UPPERCASE

Uppercase similar to lowercase.In distance reading when the uppercase height is adjusted to match the lowercase x-height, the two deliver similar performance. Illustrated with Akzidenz-Grotesk Std based on Sofie Beier Illustration.

also uppercase and lowercase. The focus is primarily on Roman text types, such as serif and sans serif. ‘the supporters of the roman typefaces claim that the blackletter shapes are way too complex and therefore hurt the eyes and cause fatigue.’ (Hermann, 2011, p. 2) Miles Tinker’s definition of legibility is: ‘concerned with perceiving letters and words, and with reading of continuous textual material. The shapes of letters must be discriminated, the characteristic words forms perceived, and the continuous text read accurately, rapidly, easily, and with understanding. In the final analysis one wants to know what typographical factor foster ease and speed of reading.’ (Tinker, Paterson, 1963 p. 7-8) Type designers have an innate perceptivity underpinning very accurate ideas about nuances and details of typeface design that have so far proved too difficult to test in a real life laboratory. However, most of the ideas presented by designers do lend themselves towards laboratory testing. So effectively, scientific investigator and designer can interchange ideas but in reality we all have assumptions without really knowing whether it is right or wrong. ‘If you question the premise that objects mean anything beyond the utilitarian, just think for a moment about all the emotional content so far beyond legibility that we can read into the minute nuances that shape a typeface and give it personality.’ (Deyan, 2008, p. 37) Type can communicate on a conscious or unconscious level with everybody, even when you are not aware of the vocabulary. A typeface has the full capacity of expressing a character or personality of the human face and representing a feeling. Beatrice

yes

Template matching. According to the template matching theory, all readers have some form of master template for each letter and store it in memory. The question is how we manage to identify letters in very different typefaces and handwritting styles? Illustration based of Sofie Beire with Didot, Bernard MT Condensed, Courier New and Scala Sans.

Legibility ranking (1 = best performance)

Visibility under reduced illumination

Perceptibility at Speed of a distance reading

Readerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s opinion of legibility

Antique

(Illustrated with bookman Old style)

Cheltenham

American Typewriter

Cloister Black

Bodoni

4-5

Garamond

Old Style

4-5

Calson Old Style

Kabel Light

Scotch Roman

Different test methods conducted for continious reading by Miles A. Tinker. We can observe a large difference in performance by the various typeface. (Illustration based on Sofie Beierâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s) The typefaces used are digital fonts but have similar style to the metal ones applied by Tinker.

Warde says ‘When a goblet has a base that looks too small for security, it does not matter how cleverly it is weighted; you feel nervous it should tip over’ (Warde, 1932, p. 92) and it is the same with type if the strokes are too light or too bold on one side compared to the other we have the feeling that the type is going to tip over. Scientific studies are largely ineffective because reading is a complex process and no simple method obtained can be reliable and have concrete results. ‘In science there are two models of how letters could be read: as a visual template or as a stimulus that matches this image, we recognize a certain letter.’ (Hermann, 2011, p. 2) The common criticism is that a reader who is put in a laboratory setting will always be aware of the action of reading. Consequently realistic measurements of the process are impossible. Researchers claim that the human mind is far too complicated to accurately be able to use any of the data extracted in the laboratory. There are many reasons why the test cannot be reliable: open areas tend to have far too many uncontrollable variables and to be able to control the environment surrounding the tester as well as the emotions that come with the procedure would be both impractical and implausible. A major point concerning the legibility dispute is that each and every test method has different results. On the basis of a suggestion by 37 publishers, Miles Tinker and Donald Paterson compared the seven most frequently mentioned typefaces for study. These were: Scotch Roman, Garamond, Antique, Bodoni, Old Style, Calson and Cheltenham. As well as this selection three radically different faces were included:

Akzidenz-Grotesk Std 12/12

Tasting the mint and tasting the whiskey And I love to roll through the streets full of birds And I steal the pigeon wings I’m a bird, I’m a board, I’m flying horse Tasting the mint and tasting the whiskey For the longboard blues... Tasting the mint and tasting the whiskey For the longboard blues...

Bookman Old Style 12/12

Leading can pose a challenge when comparing typefaces of different x-height. The optimal leading for a small x-height is not always the same as the x-height of a larger one.

Kabel Light, American Typewriter and Cloister Black (Old English). In total we have 10 typefaces in terms of visibility under a reduced illumination, perceptibility at a distance, speed of reading and asked the reader the most legible type. The study Tinker conducted found an agreement between the 4 test methods concluding that only Cloister Black and American Typewriter were read significantly slower that the other Roman texts owing to their more unfamiliar form. (Tinker, Paterson, 1963, p.46) Continuous reading has one and unique common goal which is to calculate the uninterrupted reading speed of the reader. However assuming that the fast reading of a given text means that the type is more legible would be misleading. A more accurate measure maybe the comprehension of the text while reading at a continuous pace. ‘When we read a high legible text, the text will make us read with less effort rather than increasing the speed of reading.’ (Beier, 2012, p.12) This notion has been supported by a study that has compared text with various margins; the conclusion was that even if the speed of reading was reduced while exposed to text with a larger margin, the understanding of the content was improved. So we can say that the way a text is positioned on a page has an impact on the reader too. ‘Designers often argue that book typefaces should only be tested in running text.’ (Biere, 2012, p12) For example comparing two columns of text set in different typefaces: the leading and the spacing always interact with one another and this is ‘particularly evident when matching two designs of different x height.’ (Biere, 2012, p.12). We can remark that if the leading is kept constant one of

the two columns is likely to be at an advantage. If you alter the leading to give the typeface a visual similarity, one of the two texts will take up more space that may introduce a bias. Within their experiment Tinker and Paterson themselves took precedent on the significance of the leading. ‘Bentley employing a distance method combined with speed of reading, also found that leading increased legibility of 6, 9, and 12 point type. Seven point leading appeared to be the optimal.’ (Tinker, Paterson, 1963, p.88) In every test of speed-reading is the ‘the frequent lack of significance in the measured time difference between the font tested.’ (Biere, 2012, p.12) In reality this doesn’t mean that there is no difference but most likely the test method isn’t sensitive enough to detect variations. To test continuous reading, there are several methods available one example being oral reading where the participant reads aloud and consequently the researcher will record the number of errors or the time it took. The problem with this method it is unnatural for most adults to perform this task and therefore another input is created that may affect reading speed. In addition to this the adult normally has an extensive reading knowledge and it is difficult to determine whether the mistakes are based on errors of identification as the ‘letters have been optimized for reading, and years of reading presumably allow our visual system to optimize itself to see letters well, so we supposed that people might identify letters efficiently.’ (D.Pelli, C.Burns, B. Farell, 2006, p.2) Reading aloud we often restructure the text to improve the flow, often fixating on the line of text

The skeletons of ‘c’ and ‘e’. Based on the findings of his 1973 legibility study of Baskerville 169, Univers Medium and Gill Sans Medium. J. Harris recommended open counters in the lowercase letters ‘c’ and ‘e’ to avoid confusion with the letters ‘o’ and ‘a’. He also found the ‘e-c’ confusion to be more likely in Baskerville, which has a high crossbar, than in Gill Sans, which has a lower crossbar.

Expert craftmen ftm magically ally produce duc uce a wonderful uc er instrument, tr which h rreveals al almost lm inc incredible bl improvement mp me ove over everyday da music producing od machines. ne Eye tracking. The mesurement of the eye mouvements during continuous reading can provide reasearcherss with useful information on lenghts and duration of saccades and fixations. Illustration based on Sofie Beire typeface used; Syntax LT Std

Researchers

Sanford (1888)

Bouma (1971)

Tinker (1928)

Sanford (1888)

Geyer (1977)

Bouma (1971)

Dockeray (1910)

Test Methods

distance

short exposure

parafoveal vision

Typefaces

Old Style roman

Courrier

low contrast Didone style

Old style roman

Tactype Futura

Courrier

Old style roman

y –> p i –> l w – >v h –> b m –> w b –> h p –> r n –> a h –> k t –> i e –> c l –> i f –> r l –> j k –> x c –> e o –> c v –> r q –> g y –> r j –> l m –> u c –> o

l –> i g –> q m –> n w –> v e –> o i –> l c –> e h –> b b –> h r –> f z –> i t –> i g –> v o –> n c –> o s –> e s –> o k –> h z –> r y –> r y –> p f –> t a –> d

h –> b j –> l b –> h f –> t t –> f c –> e e –> c i –> l i –> j m –> n n –> a u –> a l –> j q –> d w –> u y –> v k –> h v –> y m –> w p –> b x –> b f –> l w –> v

m –> w j –> l l –> i r –> f h –> b n i –> l l –> j y –> v i –> j o –> e t –> i b –> h i –> t e –> c f –> i t –> l k –> h v –> w j –> i w –> a y –> p z –> x q –> o

e –> o f –> l b –> h e –> a i –> l c –> r z –> x t –> l f –> j t –> i p –>n a –> o o –> a s –> n y –> v l –> i f –> r o –> e q –> g j –> l z –> r c –> i l –> j

l –> i s –> a g –> q c –> e b –> h n –> m z –> a e –> a c –> o k –> h s –> e z –> e h –> b k –> b x –> a r –> f r –> t z –> r o –> e u –> n t –> i i –> l e –> m

a –> n u s b –> h c –> e o e –> c o g s f –> l t i g –> s h –> b k i –> j l t j –> i l l –> j t f n –> m u o –>n p –>m q –> o r –> f t s –> g t –> f u –> n v –> y w –> v x –> y v y –> v z –> x

Misreading

The most frequently misread lowercase letters. Applying different test materials, this table presents a collection of studies looking into the internal legibility of lowercase letters. In all the studies, aside from Dockeray’s, the hightfrequence errors are listed first. In the Dockeray study, the errors are listed in no particular order.

rather than the content. Consequently ‘oral reading speed is half that of silent reading.’ (Biere, 2012, p12) The eye is faster than the voice when we read aloud so of course there will be a huge difference between the results. Likewise we know ‘high frequency words such as ‘the’ are read faster than other three letter words’ (Biere, 2012, p14) further biasing the result of the test. Faced with major problems while reading aloud with adults, researchers conducted the study of silent reading. How to measure reading when we cannot hear it? One of the ways around that problem was to test the subject for comprehension, but there are other problems that have raised some people will find the subject more or less interesting therefore it will impact on the concentration subsequently. Over many decades scientific have had theories about the act of reading and how we perceive the letters or words. As a matter of fact it is difficult to define whether or not we perceive words as a whole or by individual characters. One of the test that have been done by Loomis summarizes that ‘a character set is primarily determined by it’s criterion spatial bandwidth.’ (Loomis, 1990, p. 107) Therefore we can understand why uppercases perform badly as few readers are used to reading long passages of body text and can’t find a reading flow. To certain extent the width of individual the letters contribute to legibility such as in ‘ o, e, c, …’, theses letters are of similar shape and it is only the white space around the letters that help them be differentiated. It is actual fact that ‘the right half of individual letters, incidentally, is most significant for letter recognition. Similarly, the upper halves of letters better cues for

recognitions.’ (Swanson, 2000, p.101) Each and every reader has her or his own preferences to understand this experience of a given reading situation; scientists have asked participants to rank their preferred typeface and concluded that ‘It is a useful method for determination how a certain group of people responds to a certain typeface.’ (Biere, 2012, p.20) The typefaces that procure a best legibility are often the typeface which viewers see and can identify unconsciously as familiar. ‘A highly valued quality in continuous reading is the ability to see past the printed letters and lose oneself in the content of the text,’ (Beier, 2012, p. 121) achieving fluent, continuous reading and legibility. On this point Beatrice Warde states that ‘type well used is invisible type, just as the perfect talking voice is unnoticed vehicle for the transmission of words, ideas.’ (Warde, 1932, p.92) Finally we should not dismiss Swanson’s metaphor when he declares: ‘the wine is the medium that connects the wine maker and the drinker- it is not more important than the other.’ (Swanson, 2011, p.1) We should, therefore, not dismiss the importance of the countenance as much as the medium on what the message is delivered. The reader has yet all the resources of information and has his own judgment on to which typeface is more or less legible by his personal preference and unconscious habits. To use Warde’s imagery, as a typographer you have certain tendencies of taking a crystal goblet instead of a plain

glass to taste your wine and the same happens within the domain of typefaces and their legibility. In this way the aesthetic would outweigh the practicality of the typeface, form is taken over function. We all have the possibility of opening ‘the front door of the science of typography. Within lies hundred of rooms, but unless you start by assuming that printing is meant to convey a specific and coherent idea, it is very easy to find yourself in the wrong house altogether.’ (Warde, 1923, p.92) It is therefore important not to dismiss Warde with the assumption that she ‘was not merely a shallow snob obsessed with reassuring herself that she consumed the best available drugs, perhaps it is not the glass that she should have criticized, but the wine.’ (Swanson, 2000, p.1) As Swanson says it is not just the vessel that is important but also what the vessel holds and therefore to be able to have an objective result to define the legibility of a typeface doesn’t just depend on the what kind of typeface the text has been set to but also what the printed words mean. So the content/meaning therefore has an equal importance as the container/typeface. As in the silent reading tests, comprehension and therefore meaning is analysed. Is this too subjective a field to be successfully measured with these methods? The emotive attachment that the readers have to the text has a direct bearing on their concentration and therefore comprehension, consequently making it impossible to scientifically measure best legibility. To define or not that a typeface is more or less legible than another would thus depend ultimately both on your preferences of subject matter and typeface aesthetic as well as your familiarity with any particular font.

Bibliography

Books: Baines, Phil and Haslam, Andrew, 2002, Type & Typography. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd Beier, Sofie, 2012, Reading Letter, designing for legibility. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers Berger, John, 1972, Ways of seeing. London: British Broadcasting Corporation; London: Penguin Drucker, Johanna, 1994, Visible word: experimental typography and modern art. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Garfield, Simon, 2010, Just my type: a book about fonts. London: TJ International Heller, Steven and Meggs, Philip B., 2001, Texts on type: critical writings on typography. New York: Allworth Press Helmut, Schmid, 2003, Typography today / concept and design. 3rd ed. Hall, Inc. Shinko Makoto statement Hochuli, Jost, 2003, Detail in typography: letters, letterspacing, words, wordspacing, lines, linespacing, columns. Switzerland: Hyphen Press Kane, John, 2011, A type primer, 2nd ed. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd Lupton, Ellen, 2004, Thinking with type: a critical guide for designers, writers, editors & students. New York: Princeton Architectural Press McLean, Ruari, 2000, Thames and Hudson manual of typography. 3rd ed. London: Thames and Hudson McLuhan, Marshall, 1962, Gutenberg galaxy: the making of typographic man. Toronto: University of Toronto Press

Noble, Ian and Bestley, Russell, 2003, Visual research: an introduction to research methodologies in graphic design. Switzerland: AVA Publishing SA Ruder, Emil, 2001, Typographie: ein Gestaltungslehrbuch =Typography: a manual of design =Typographie: un manual de creation, 7th ed. Switzerland: Heer Druck, AG, Sulgen Spiekermann, Erik and Ginger, E. M.,1993, Stop Stealing Sheep & find out how type word. Mountain View, California: Adobe Press Sudjic, Deyan, 2009, Language of things, 2nd ed. London: Penguin Â Swanson, Gunnar, 2000, Graphic design & reading: explorations of an uneasy relationship. New York : Allworth PressÂ Tinker, Miles A., 1969, Legibility of print, 3rd ed. Ames: Iowa State University Press Warde, Beatrice, 1956, The Crystal Goblet-Sixteen essays on Typography. Cleveland OH and New York: World publishing Co Web Links: Buswell, Guy T., Fundamental reading habits: a study of their development, 1922 (digitalised book), Available at: http://ia600407.us.archive.org/29/items/ fundamentalreadi00buswuoft/fundamentalreadi00buswuoft.pdf (Accessed 12 February 2012). De Lange, Rudi W., Esterhuizen, Hendry L. and Beatty, Derek, 1993, Performance differences between Times and Helvetica in a reading task (ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING) Available at: http://cajun.cs.nott.ac.uk/ compsci/epo/papers/volume6/issue3/rudi.pdf (Accessed on 13 February 2012) Do typefaces matter? 20 July 2010 Last updated at 12:34(Article), Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-10689931 Accessed 6 March 2012].

Franz, Laura, 2010, Is the Font Easy to Read? Anatomy and Legibility, (Online) Available at http://www.goodwebfonts.com/legibility_twd.pdf (Accessed on 18 march 2012) Haley, Allan, Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s About Legibility (Article), Available at: http://www.fonts. com/aboutfonts/articles/typography/legibility.htm (Accessed 16 February 2012). Hermann, Ralf,Does a large x-height make fonts more legible?, 2012 (article), Available at: http://opentype.info/blog/2012/04/10/x-height-and-legibility/ (Accessed 10 April 2012). Hermann, Ralf, What makes letters legible?, 2011 (article), Available at: http://opentype.info/blog/2011/08/01/what-makes-letters-legible/ (Accessed 16 March 2012). Het Wereld Boek, Amsterdam, 2008, A view of latin typography in relationship to the world. Available at: http://www.peterbilak.com/texts/a_ view_of_latin_typography (Accessed on 18 march 2012) INCUNABULA,2007, History of typography: Humanist (essay), Available at: http://ilovetypography.com/2007/11/06/type-terminology-humanist-2/> (Accessed 11 February 2012). International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 1968, (Bibliography) Available at: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3045000915.html (Accessed on 1 April 2012) Loomis, J. Jack, 1990, A Model of Character Recognition and Legibility, (essay) Available at: http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/~loomis/loomis_90.pdf (Accessed on 22 febuary 2012) Lupton, Ellen , 2004, The science of Typography (essay) Available at http:// www.typotheque.com/articles/the_science_of_typography (Accessed on 22 febuary 2012)

Lupton, Ellen, 2004, Writing lessons: Modern Design Theory, (essay) Available at: http://www.typotheque.com/articles/writing_lessons_modern_ design_theory (Accessed on 22 febuary 2012) Pelli, Denis G., Burns, Catherine W., Farell, Bart, and Moore-Page, Deborah C., (essay) Feature detection and letter identiﬁcation Available at: http:// www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/ucacsjp/Reading/FeatDetec.pdf (Accessed 15 February 2012). Pelli, Denis G., Burns, Catherine W., Farell, Bart, and Moore-Page, Deborah C., Identifying Letters, Available at: http://www.isr.syr.edu/faculty/bfarell/ Pelli,Burns,Farell&Moore_2005.pdf [Accessed 15 February 2012). Segalini, Alessandro, Basic Glossary of typeface Anatomy, (Glossary), Available at: http://www.as8.it/handouts/type-classification.pdf (Accessed 10 April 2012). Part 3: SIècle des Lumières, 2008, History of typography: Transitional (essay), Available at: http://ilovetypography.com/2008/01/17/type-terms-transitionaltype/ (Accessed 11 February 2012). Swanson, Gunnar, Clarety: Drinking from the Crystal Goblet, 2011 (essay), Available at: http://www.gunnarswanson.com/writing/Clarety.pdf (Accessed 16 February 2012). Swanson, Gunnar, Emigre 31, Summer 1994 and Emigre No. 70: The Look Back Issue—Selections (article/letter), Available at: http://www. gunnarswanson.com/writing/UglyLetter.pdf (Accessed 16 February 2012).