Palatino

Herman Zapf was a bit surprised when his Palatino design became a big hit as a text font. It was intended as a display face, for titles and headings, and he was busy developing the text version, Aldus, that was intended to pair with it. Maybe he should have let the public see that one first!

I have a version of Aldus in my type collection and I would definitely use it rather than Palatino for text in a novel. I did set my very first novel, The Middle of Nowhere, in Palatino, being somewhat less knowledgeable at the time. It looks okay but it does not have the readability of some other choices. Palatino will definitely slow down the eye, though admittedly not that much.

I don’t use the typeface for fiction body text now, but it is my default for poetry — when in doubt, print that poem in Palatino. Typically, I would print that a point or two larger than in a novel, which better suits a display face. And, of course, I do not want the reader to rush through the poems so I’m not interested in quick readability.

I would certainly not discourage anyone from using Palatino for a novel or story collection. It is a well-crafted and attractive design; if you like it, use it!

Monospaced

I like to use a monospaced font for my early drafts (as well as for writing poetry and songs). I find it more suited to spotting mistakes. The main criteria is that it simply looks good. Well spaced, punctuation large and easy to differentiate, and a look more similar to book text (with serifs, of course). Italic and bold versions are nice but not essential — the ones generated by the computer are good enough for drafting. These are the ones I’ve used and generally liked:

Linux Libertine Mono is the most book-like of my monospaced fonts. No bolds nor italics. Spacing is good and punctuation shows up well enough (though not as obviously as with some other fonts). Pretty much my main choice at this time.

BitStream’s Prestige BT has italics and bolds. Somewhat book-like, though it is more a typewriter font. Everything shows up well.

Century Schoolbook Mono is more book-like than most. No bolds nor italics. I used this a lot at one point. Incidentally, when I don’t draft with a monospaced typeface, Century Schoolbook is my usual choice.

These two I don’t like quite as well but could do an adequate job:

Go Mono has italics and bolds. Reasonably book-like slab serif but feels a little too bunched up.

Courier Prime has italics and bolds. A much better and meatier Courier than what comes with most computers, but still has the typewriter look — not much like book text.

I’ve found one fault or another with everything else I’ve tested. That doesn’t mean I won’t keep my eyes open for something new.

Legible Type

Readability versus legibility: in reading, the two overlap but there is a difference. Legibility means all the letters and punctuation are readily recognized. Readability means the eye moves along quickly, with understanding of the text. Every book should be, to some degree, readable.

And if it is, it will also be somewhat legible. However, when readability is the priority, the eye quickly scans over the letter forms, the punctuation marks, sensing them more than consciously recognizing them. That is great for a good reader.

For a beginner, legible typefaces such as Century Schoolbook are preferable. Reading is slower but comprehension, ideally, is improved. When I am writing a draft, I have that same need for legibility. It helps me see mistakes, lets me make sure the punctuation is proper. With some typefaces, it is, for example, difficult to determine which direction quotation marks might slant, or to make out the difference between a comma and a period. That is not a good thing at the drafting stage, nor in early rounds of editing.

I sometimes write with that aforementioned Century Schoolbook. Other times, I prefer to work with a monospaced font at that stage; Linux Libertine Mono is the go-to at the moment, but others work. I do prefer a mono typeface that looks more like the serif fonts one would find in a book. Again, big, easily-read punctuation is particularly desirable.

Incidentally, though Century Schoolbook is great for writing or for children’s books, I would not be inclined to set an adult book in it. If one desires its look, there are ‘tighter’ takes on the Century typeface — more readable ones — or other type designs in the Scotch Roman style that should be preferable.

Stempel Garamond

Stempel Garamond was first issued by the Stempel foundry almost a hundred years ago as Garamond-Antiqua. It was—and remains—one of the more faithful and attractive revivals of the Garamond typefaces. There have been a number of versions since, clones, reissues, digitalizations. One of the better known would be the free URW++ Garmond No.8, which may be found readily online. It is ‘almost’ an open license font; a publisher needn’t worry about using it for print or embedding it in a PDF. I see it pretty much as a publisher’s starting kit, dependable and usable for pretty much any project.

Incidentally, its italics are based on ones actually designed by Claude Garamond, where many other Garamond typefaces use italics by Robert Granjon, a respected successor of Garamond.

The Garamond Original typeface—a name used by both Bitstream and SoftMaker—is essentially a clone of Stempel. As with Garamond No.8, they lack opentype features for those who want or need them, though SoftMaker does offer separate small caps. That makes up for much. The typeface is included in SoftMaker’s MegaFont collection, which remains a rather good deal.

Not surprisingly, various opentype projects based on Garamond No.8 have popped up over the last couple decades but none have seemed to go much of anywhere. Be that as it may, the versions that are available are quite viable alternatives to commercial Garamonds or the popular EB Garamond and other open license Garamond (or Garamond-like) fonts. Stempel Garamond, under whatever name, is a good choice for anyone producing books.

Arachis Press used versions in all my fantasy novels set among the Mora (the Malvern Trilogy, the Mora Trilogy, etc). We are entirely likely to use Stempel again in books to come. Indeed, we consider it our default for novels.

Busorama

Busorama was a typeface that had a period of popularity in the last century, perhaps most notably as a titling face on a number of speculative fiction novels. For better of worse, it remains evocative of that period; I would think at least thrice before using it today, even ironically.

Although the original commercial version remains available for purchase, there are various clones out there, including at least one of them open license. Here are a couple covers that used Busorama:

 

Times Replacements

In the early days of digital type, one found a number of typefaces billed as ‘Times replacements,’ some free, some not. A few were simply clones of the ubiquitous Times New Roman, such as the Nimbus Roman made free by URW++. As good a choice as any if one feels an actual need for Times NR.

Then there were those that had no relationship to Times, but whose designers hoped would unseat it as the go-to font. Adobe’s Utopia was an excellent (and free) alternative, but did not catch on widely—though I personally am quite fond of it! Times NR, as most know, is better suited to newspapers (originally designed for the Times of London) yet continues to be used in ways that are not really ideal.

And since it is a standard of sorts, we have a third group of replacements: typefaces that are metrically identical to Times, that will fill the same space on a page, when used at the same size and weight. At the same time, they should ideally look better, without the cramped appearance one can get with Times New Roman, especially on wider pages. Three early offerings that have held up are Linux Libertine, Gentium, and Liberation Serif (aka Tinos). All three of these are free and more-or-less open license (you can definitely use them in your printed book).

None look much like Times. Liberation is close to being a ‘humanist’ slab serif. I can not say I’m fond of its somewhat squared-off forms (which may have taken some inspiration from Zapf’s Melior). It looks okay and is pretty legible, maybe working better on line than in print and certainly an improvement on Times in most applications. Liberation Serif is included in the LibreOffice suite and with various flavors of the Linux OS. Use it on a web site? Sure. Write a book draft with it? It could work. Print a book? Not my first (nor even second) choice. Maybe for something nonfiction or an instruction manual. You might even get away with subbing it for Times in that term paper! :)

The award-winning Gentium has been one of SIL’s premiere free, open license fonts for some time. Unlike Liberation, it is very much intended for print use. To my eyes, it has something of a Goudy-esque appearance. That’s not from any careful analysis of the letter shapes, just how it looks to me. Gentium is sometimes described as ‘calligraphic.’ It is not an ostentatious typeface but has a charm to it, and could certainly work in a book. It does set rather closely, however, so make sure to give it some room. Readabilty is quite good but not quite on, say, a Garamond level. Nor does it have the legibility of something like Century Schoolbook—or the Liberation mentioned above. I have never printed a novel in Gentium but have used it for a couple books of poetry. The Plus version has loads of opentype features available—always desirable—as well as multiple language applicability.

Much of what I said of Gentium is also true of Linux Libertine. Libertine is a bit more stolid, closer to typical book text. The design is akin to such mid-20th Century neo-humanist typefaces as Palatino and Berling and especially Minion—definitely suitable for setting the text in a novel. Aesthetic opinions are a tad divided on the design. Some, I think are simply biased against any free font! I would say it is every bit as good as many issued by major foundries. And, of course, there is no ‘best’ typeface, even for a specific use. Libertine is readable enough and fairly ‘invisible,’ making it a good all-around choice. I’ll admit it is what I use to read ebooks. The latest version also offers most of the opentype features we might desire, adding to its versatility.

Keep in mind, these three typefaces follow the metrics of Times NR, which means a bit narrow and closely set. Gentium or Libertine might suit a double-column layout in a magazine quite nicely, where another font could appear ‘loose.’ Also keep in mind that you don’t need that Times compatibility most of the time. But these are now time-tested typefaces and one can’t really go wrong (well, too wrong) using them.

Cormorant for Text?

Cormorant is a popular open license typeface that has been available for nearly a decade now. It can be described as Garamond-like but is based on no historic model. The shapes may tend more toward Jannon’s than Garamond’s. That is of little concern of itself, but some might feel its look is a bit too showy for everyday use.

The original Coromorant, released in a number of useful styles and weights, was described as a display font. That is, it is best used at larger sizes, like twenty points or more. To be sure, it could be used smaller but its look at typical text sizes of ten to twelve points might prove disappointing. That has not prevented it from being utilized in just that role.

So, Cormorant Garamond came along with a bit of redrawing to work better at smaller sizes. Whether it is completely successful in this would have to be decided by the end users, but it definitely is more successful as a text typeface than the original version. One could use both in one print publication, Cormorant for titling, Cormorant Garamond for body text. I’ve yet to try it out myself, admittedly; if the right sort of project came along, I certainly would, but I’m not sure if it has quite the readability I would want for a novel.

We mustn’t forget those other versions available. The Upright is, in essence, an upright italic. It, I have used in small projects. The Infant version could, I suppose, be dropped into a more sophisticated children’s book. I don’t know what the Unicase is good for. Maybe not for anything I’ll ever design!

Then there is a matching sans, available: Ysabeau, also in a variety of weights and styles, and likewise free and open license. I have found it quite a bit more useful than Cormorant, as a stand-alone typeface, but the two will match up well too in print. For that matter, Ysabeau could work as a titling font with a number of old style serifs, or modern neo-humanist ones, for that matter.

I would discourage no one from trying out and using Cormorant, in any of its forms. Simply be aware there are other useful open license typefaces out there, ones that don’t offer as much ‘wow’ on first look, that might be as well or better suited to your needs.

Charter Member

In the early days of the personal computer, type designer Matthew Carter created the Charter typeface for Bitstream, his company at the time. It has proven to be a successful and lasting design. Originally, it was not created with screen use in mind but, rather, printing with the low resolution printers of the time (as was Adobe’s Utopia and another Bitstream offering, Deja Vu aka Vera). However, it works quite well as a digital display. I’d say it looks better than some designed specifically for that purpose (including Carter’s later Georgia).

Bitstream gave away rights to Charter early on (as they did with Deja Vu), making it free to use for most purposes. One can find various free downloads of Charter in both truetype and opentype formats, as well as a commercial version with more features. There is also X-Charter, which adds more opentype features, and Charis from SIL.

Charis is sort of Charter; that is, it does not derive directly from the original typeface but is a redrawn clone of it. The two look pretty much identical (there are subtle differences and Charis has wider line spacing) but Charis adds in support for more languages, as well as phonetic symbols. These are things I do not need personally but others might. What Charis does offer me is a range of useful opentype features. That is why it is the version of Charter I use myself.

Use for what? It is my ‘utility font’ on my computer, for notes and information and such. For some time I used the excellent Sitka (also a Matthew Carter design) for this, but it is a Microsoft proprietary typeface and I decided I did not want to depend on anything without an open license. All the more so were I to use it in a book! I have published one novel set in Charis, the science-fiction time travel tale ‘When Man Was Young.’ It looks fine to me and I do feel its classy but no-nonsense appearance is suited to SF (as well as nonfiction).

This brings us to Adobe’s Source Serif, also an open license typeface and one with a considerable resemblance to Charter. This is largely due to both drawing from the same Eighteenth Century type designs of Pierre-Simon Fournier. That Charter did influence Source directly, as well, I have little doubt. One could certainly substitute one for the other without most readers noticing. Source is a little more oriented toward screen use; however, I have used it without problem for one novel (also science fiction), ‘Alienese.’

Charter/Charis may be as close to being a ‘desert island’ font for me as any I could name. It’s not my first choice for writing drafts—either fiction or poetry—but it would work well enough. Though some genres might call for a different look, it certainly is acceptable for printing books. Charis is available for download both from SIL International and through Google Fonts.

Atlantic and Americana

Atlantic Inline has been something of a mystery font, a typeface available as a free download almost as long as the internet has existed, but no one seems to know its origin, its designer, its license. But if one takes a look at it, Atlantic is obviously based on the Extra Bold weight of the well-known Americana. That still tells us nothing of who is responsible or whether it may be used commercially!

 

As it seems to have been 'abandoned' by its designer, it is probably safe to use. However, the typeface is so familiar, so ubiquitous, that I would think twice (or even three times) before incorporating it in a design, much less a book interior (where licensing actually matters). Moreover, Americana was designed in the Sixties so I would not use it anywhere that called for a 'classic' typeface. It is a nice looking font, though, one must admit.

Caslon Thoughts

Caslon is one of the classic typefaces. However there are a great many fonts out there wearing the Caslon name that range from reasonably accurate versions to ones with little actual resemblance to the original. Add to this a number of Caslon-esque typefaces found under other names.

One of my favorites—indeed, my frequent go-to—is Imprint. Many will recognize the name from the inline Imprint Shadow version long bundled with Windows. Ignoring that over-used variant, Imprint is a quite nice choice for text, an early Twentieth Century take on the Caslon concept. I’ve used clones (Bitstream’s Dutch 766, SoftMaker’s Indiana) in books and been satisfied with the result.

Not that there aren’t other decent Caslons available, both commercial and free. Adobe’s is nice, if maybe a bit too regularized (one can say the same of Imprint, perhaps). Some are just a little overly ornate or optimized for display purposes. QTCaslan is not a bad free alternative, though a bit lacking in features. One could certainly create a credible book design with it. I do like Caslon for a more ‘serious’ feel to book text. So do others, which is why it has often appeared in nonfiction and textbooks. I might tend to use something in the Caslon vein for historical fiction.

The only typeface named Caslon you will find free in Google Fonts is Libre Caslon. The display version looks good and I would feel confident using it in titling. The text version, not so much—it seems more suited for on-screen use than print. However, I might suggest Lora as a substitute. The Roman style is decidedly in the Caslon mold and does look good in print. The italic strays further from the original model but stands quite well as a design on its own merits.

 

Readability Versus Legibility

Thoughts on type choices for authors and small/self-publishers, by Stephen Brooke

One might think readable text is the equivalent of legible text, but they are two different typographic goals. Readability brings quick, effortless reading, without tiring the eye, each letter and word flowing into the next. This is what we desire in a printed book of fiction. The drawback of highly readable text is that we are less likely to note typos and other mistakes, and also that comprehension might not be as good as with a text that gives us a slower read.

Legible text lets us see everything. This is obviously desirable for headlines, advertising, and so on, but not so desirable for print fiction. For books where we might wish to slow things down a bit and increase comprehension, as in poetry or textbooks, a slightly less readable font might be the way to go. Legibility over readability is also the preference in books for small children. Perhaps magazine articles should sometimes slow down the reader a tad, as well. Still, all these do need reasonably readable text.

Now, when I write drafts of my fiction I use a highly legible typeface. Century Schoolbook has been a favorite for this—and also for such applications as textbooks, children’s literature, and legal documents. Recently, I have gone to Sitka which has the advantage of coming installed on every Windows PC as a system font. That certainly simplifies moving documents from one computer to another (yes, I know some use Macs or Linux—as have I in the past—but I do not expect to ever work on anything but Windows in the future). Sitka also displays well on-screen, and (like Schoolbook) has large, easily recognizable punctuation. Punctuation is one of the major problems with many readable typefaces; it sometimes becomes difficult to recognize just what punctuation is being used. Quotation marks can particularly be a problem.

At times, I have gone to monospaced fonts for drafting (and still prefer them for poetry and songwriting). These make spotting mistakes even easier. A personal favorite is Bitstream’s Prestige 12, but there are other perfectly good choices.

NOTE, about a year later:  I went back to Century as a drafting font, the free URW version, as I decided I did not want to depend on one of Microsoft's proprietary designs. And my current choice for a monospaced drafting font is Libertine Mono, which is open license.

I use the typical readable typefaces in my published fiction (all this holds true for self-publishers and indies in general). Garamond and its many variants and descendants is generally a good choice (but not always, mind you—there are some strange, spiky Garamond derivatives out there that are better avoided). Caslons are usually good. The many versions of Palatino? Maybe not quite so readable, though certainly acceptable. They are my default for printing poetry. Incidentally, Palatino was never intended for text, being designed by Herman Zapf as a titling font to go with his Aldus typeface. If you can get hold of Aldus, consider using it instead in prose books.

Plantin has been a safe choice for a century. Crimson Text (not 'Pro') might be seen as an open license alternative for today (available free from Google Fonts). Keep in mind that the bulk of the free, open license type available is not particular intended for nor suited to use in your novel. Some that look promising are really better suited to legible text on a web site. Libre Caslon, for example; one could get away with using it in a print book but there are certainly better choices.

And by all means avoid Times New Roman. Its tight spacing works well in narrow columns but it is neither readable nor particularly legible spread across a wider page. There are loads of choices, really, some free, some economically priced (like Softmaker’s Megafont collection). Just make sure the license allows commercial use if you are going to use them in print or embedded in a PDF ebook (embedding in an EPUB is an whole other matter—I only specify ‘serif’ as the typeface in mine and avoid all that).

Of course, none of that matters for the typeface you use to write your drafts. Pick one you like, one that lets you see what you need to see. It needn’t be anything like what will be used in the final product; indeed, it’s better if it is quite different, so you don’t get used to seeing the same type all the way through the editing process. In other words, start legible and move to readable when the work is ready.