Return to Video

Lecture 7.2: Typography (10:47)

  • 0:01 - 0:06
    Let’s take a look at the atoms of visual design: letterforms.
  • 0:06 - 0:10
    This is the letter R, typeset in Gill Sans.
  • 0:10 - 0:14
    Gill Sans was designed by Eric Gill and released in 1928.
  • 0:14 - 0:17
    There’s a couple of things that I’d like to point out about this letter right here:
  • 0:17 - 0:23
    One of them is that it has the perceptual characteristic of consistent weight all throughout;
  • 0:23 - 0:28
    however, the actual thickness of the letter varies considerably over different parts.
  • 0:28 - 0:31
    So, if you look at some points of the letter, like the bottom,
  • 0:33 - 0:38
    you can see that they are much thicker than at other points in the letter.
  • 0:41 - 0:47
    And what you see in these atoms is exactly what you’ll see throughout the entirety of graphic design,
  • 0:47 - 0:50
    which is that we’re going for something that feels perceptually balanced —
  • 0:50 - 0:57
    or may have perceptual uniformity — when the actuality may be quite different.
  • 0:57 - 1:03
    This letter was also my very first assignment as a graphic design student at the Rhode Island School of Design:
  • 1:03 - 1:09
    We had to draw this letter, one foot high, in black paint, on a white background.
  • 1:09 - 1:12
    It may seem like a silly exercise,
  • 1:12 - 1:17
    but it’s a great way to understand intimately the curves and strokes of the letterform,
  • 1:17 - 1:20
    and it’s also really good at training both your eye and training your hand;
  • 1:20 - 1:25
    Maybe it’s also a hazing ritual that I’ve just post-hoc rationalized.
  • 1:25 - 1:32
    Anyhow, moving along, let’s look at the different parts of a typeface.
  • 1:32 - 1:38
    One term you may be familiar with from using on your computer is the point size or the font size.
  • 1:38 - 1:40
    And what’s notable about this is
  • 1:40 - 1:46
    it seems like a number that ought to be set in stone and consistent across all typefaces,
  • 1:46 - 1:48
    but it’s really not.
  • 1:48 - 1:53
    Most of our terminology from typefaces comes from when they were set in lead,
  • 1:53 - 2:00
    and the point size of a typeface really just means the height of the lead block that the type was set in,
  • 2:00 - 2:07
    which has some relationship to the actual letter size, but is not completely consistent.
  • 2:10 - 2:13
    For example, you can see, for the same point size,
  • 2:13 - 2:16
    here’s a letter S in Gill Sans, and a letter S in Calibri,
  • 2:16 - 2:22
    and you can that the Calibri S is lower than the Gill Sans S.
  • 2:27 - 2:29
    Our second term is leading.
  • 2:29 - 2:33
    If we have solid blocks of lead type that form the letters,
  • 2:33 - 2:39
    the spacing that we get between the lines was achieved by putting thin strips of lead in between the lines,
  • 2:39 - 2:42
    and that was called the leading.
  • 2:42 - 2:47
    It’s customary to have 20% of your font size as your leading;
  • 2:47 - 2:51
    and so, if in your word processor you’ve set 10-point type,
  • 2:51 - 2:59
    it will usually automatically add an extra 2 points of spacing to put 12 points in between each line.
  • 2:59 - 3:05
    The height of the lowercase letters is called the x-height, from the “x”.
  • 3:05 - 3:10
    Some typefaces have a higher x-height, like Lucida Bright or Georgia;
  • 3:10 - 3:14
    other typefaces have a lower x-height, like Baskerville.
  • 3:14 - 3:16
    And this is important for design — especially online —
  • 3:16 - 3:23
    because typefaces that have a higher x-height will be easier to read at smaller point sizes
  • 3:23 - 3:28
    and on low resolution devices like most screens.
  • 3:28 - 3:31
    Conversely, typefaces with a low x-height, like Baskerville,
  • 3:31 - 3:37
    are used when you’re trying to give elegance, or a “Belle Époque” feel to something.
  • 3:37 - 3:40
    And sprouting up and dropping down from the x-height
  • 3:40 - 3:45
    are the ascenders — like the top stem of the h and the dot of the i —,
  • 3:45 - 3:50
    and your descenders — like the y, p, g.
  • 3:50 - 3:55
    In general, a typeface that has a low x-height will tend to have long ascenders and descenders,
  • 3:55 - 4:01
    and a typeface that has a tall x-height will tend to have more squashed ascenders and descenders.
  • 4:06 - 4:08
    Typefaces can also vary in their weight.
  • 4:08 - 4:15
    So here have an example of light on the left, regular or roman in the middle, and bold on the right.
  • 4:15 - 4:19
    Sometimes you’ll see weights in between like demibold or semibold,
  • 4:19 - 4:23
    and, even to the further to the right of bold, you’ll see black.
  • 4:23 - 4:25
    Number six on the list are serifs.
  • 4:25 - 4:33
    Serifs are the doohickeys on the end of letters that give them that chiselled look.
  • 4:33 - 4:35
    [There are] a couple more that are bonus:
  • 4:35 - 4:39
    Some faces (typefaces) will also include small caps — which sure are exactly what they sound like,
  • 4:39 - 4:42
    smaller versions of capital[s and] numbers.
  • 4:42 - 4:45
    These can be used as headers, or they can also be used
  • 4:45 - 4:50
    to put acronyms and other capital texts inside a block of body text.
  • 4:52 - 4:54
    And one thing that you may not know is —
  • 4:54 - 5:00
    just like letters come in uppercase and lowercase, numbers do too.
  • 5:00 - 5:01
    These numbers, set in Neutraface,
  • 5:01 - 5:06
    provide an example of something that has just small ascenders and descenders;
  • 5:06 - 5:09
    in some cases these can be more dramatic.
  • 5:09 - 5:11
    Lowercase numbers are useful
  • 5:11 - 5:17
    when you want numbers to fit in with a larger block of text and not stand out.
  • 5:17 - 5:20
    One of the most common questions I get asked about graphic design is:
  • 5:20 - 5:22
    “Which typeface should I use?”
  • 5:22 - 5:24
    And a lot of people have heard a story
  • 5:24 - 5:28
    where serif typefaces are generally recommended for body text
  • 5:28 - 5:32
    and sans serif typefaces are recommended for headers.
  • 5:32 - 5:37
    And that’s, on the whole, not bad advice.
  • 5:37 - 5:42
    There is an often-repeated claim that the reason that this is a good heuristic
  • 5:42 - 5:47
    is because serif typefaces, with those doohickeys at the end,
  • 5:47 - 5:52
    give your eyes something to latch onto, and consequently they’re easier to read.
  • 5:52 - 5:55
    It’s an interesting hypothesis.
  • 5:55 - 5:58
    So I looked into this a little bit for all of you,
  • 5:58 - 6:00
    and there’s some challenges in trying to figure this out.
  • 6:00 - 6:07
    For starters, individual differences in readers dwarf any manipulation effects of the typeface —
  • 6:07 - 6:10
    like, some people read a whole lot faster than others,
  • 6:10 - 6:16
    and so it’s difficult to measure differences in the readability of typefaces.
  • 6:16 - 6:19
    Also, reading requires familiarity:
  • 6:19 - 6:23
    It’s not like we’re born knowing what a letter R looks like; we need to practice.
  • 6:23 - 6:28
    And so if you learn with one style of the letter R, you’ll probably be faster with that one;
  • 6:28 - 6:33
    and if you learn with another style of the letter R, you’ll be faster with that one.
  • 6:34 - 6:38
    If even when we got past all those challenges,
  • 6:38 - 6:41
    it can be a little bit difficult to figure out exactly how you should measure this.
  • 6:43 - 6:48
    Well, I can’t go so far as to say that the serif hypothesis is definitively untrue;
  • 6:48 - 6:53
    what I can say is that there’s a lot of evidence to support that it actually is real.
  • 6:53 - 6:57
    And Alex Poole does a great job of describing this on his web site:
  • 6:58 - 7:03
    He writes that “What initially seemed a neat dichotomous question of serif versus sans serif
  • 7:03 - 7:07
    has resulted in a body of research consisting of weak claims and counter-claims,
  • 7:07 - 7:11
    and study after study with findings of ‘no difference’.
  • 7:11 - 7:16
    Is it the case that more than one hundred years of research has been marred by [repeated] methodological flaws,
  • 7:16 - 7:21
    or are serifs simply a typographical ‘red herring’?”
  • 7:21 - 7:26
    It does seem that mixed-case type like you get in a sentence — upper and lower mixed together —
  • 7:26 - 7:30
    is faster to read than all caps, presumably because
  • 7:30 - 7:34
    you get greater vertical variation with the ascenders and descenders in lowercase letters,
  • 7:34 - 7:40
    and that gives your eye more information as it’s reading.
  • 7:40 - 7:45
    Also, in general, proportional fonts seem to be faster than monospaced fonts, like a typewriter.
  • 7:45 - 7:52
    So, typewriter font[s] — slower to read — [but] that stuff only matters if you have to read a whole lot.
  • 7:53 - 8:00
    But the simplest summary is that, in practice, legibility simply amounts to what you’re accustomed to.
  • 8:00 - 8:05
    What do these words say? The bottom half is obscured.
  • 8:05 - 8:09
    As many of you guessed, “I am a jelly donut”.
  • 8:09 - 8:13
    How about this one here? Here the top half is obscured.
  • 8:13 - 8:15
    Seems a little harder?
  • 8:15 - 8:19
    “jfk spoke in berlin.”
  • 8:19 - 8:25
    Turns out that more information seems to be encoded in the top half of texts than in the bottom half.
  • 8:25 - 8:27
    And what does this say?
  • 8:27 - 8:32
    [I] bet many of you saw it as “THE CAT”,
  • 8:32 - 8:36
    and fewer people, “TAE CHT”.
  • 8:36 - 8:42
    And that’s because expectation plays a really important role in what we read.
  • 8:42 - 8:44
    And if you’re really perceptive,
  • 8:44 - 8:53
    you may have realized that those two middle letters are actually exactly the same letter,
  • 8:53 - 8:57
    so the only difference is what you’re expecting to see in each case.
  • 8:57 - 9:01
    Your prior probability influences your interpretation.
  • 9:01 - 9:07
    So, if you put all that together and return to our original question of “Which typeface should I use”,
  • 9:07 - 9:09
    the answer is “It depends.”
  • 9:09 - 9:12
    If you’re putting down a long block of text,
  • 9:12 - 9:16
    it’s best to use a typeface that many people will be familiar with;
  • 9:16 - 9:21
    and if you’re working online, use something that has a relatively high x-height.
  • 9:21 - 9:25
    On the other hand, if you’re making a logo or a sign,
  • 9:25 - 9:29
    or something that’s short and intended to be dramatic,
  • 9:29 - 9:33
    then you probably want to use something a little bit funkier as your typeface —
  • 9:33 - 9:37
    something that’s going to catch attention and be unique, memorable.
  • 9:38 - 9:43
    And typefaces — like everything in life — [build] up reputation.
  • 9:43 - 9:47
    So, over time, certain typefaces come to mean certain things.
  • 9:47 - 9:51
    And here’s a great example from Hoefler and Frere-Jones, writing on their blog.
  • 9:51 - 9:56
    They talk about how Baskerville seems like it’s out of a literary magazine
  • 9:56 - 10:03
    and Optima seems to remind us of cheap 1950’s hygiene products.
  • 10:03 - 10:08
    Here are two easy exercises you can use to improve your typographical eye:
  • 10:08 - 10:14
    The first one is: Look around you for all of the different ways that the same typeface gets deployed;
  • 10:14 - 10:17
    that will give you a sense of its range.
  • 10:17 - 10:26
    And the second one is: Look at how the same text, with different typefaces, really changes its meaning.
  • 10:27 - 10:30
    In this class we have a lot of ground to cover quickly,
  • 10:30 - 10:33
    and so unfortunately we can’t spend too much time on typography;
  • 10:33 - 10:36
    but it’s a fascinating subject, and if you’d like to learn more about this,
  • 10:36 - 10:42
    there are many great books and design resources online, and they’re growing rapidly.
  • 10:42 - 10:48
    Here are just a few that I think are particularly good.
Title:
Lecture 7.2: Typography (10:47)
Video Language:
English

English subtitles

Revisions