"Masterful" Typesetting

Primary tabs

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
Dan Hall's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Oct 2005 - 2:40pm
"Masterful" Typesetting
0

An article from the Wall Street Journal on "mouse type" and the art of unreadability:

[[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020412420457715467000417353...|It's Not Your Eyes…the Fine Print Is Getting Really, Really Small]]

Andreas Stötzner's picture
Joined: 12 Mar 2007 - 10:21am
0

Of course it is a challenge to pack a full contract into the tiny box of a mobile phone. But that’s no excuse.
Time for a *typographically correct* movement –?

Ben Archer's picture
Offline
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 - 9:15pm
0

Hi Dan

As it says in the article, such contractual small print is only unreadable because the originator doesn't want the end-user to read it. Other instances of small print can be perfectly readable; the x-height of the body type in the following image is about .6mm, and it was photographically reduced from a larger set size to get it down to this (‘A Book is Made’ printed by Jarrold & Sons, Norwich, UK for an exhibition by the Federation of Master Printers in the 1980s). Apologies for the picture quality.