Points/Picas and Didots/Ciceros - Typographic Measurement Debate

Primary tabs

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
Aimee Beckett's picture
Offline
Joined: 22 Jan 2013 - 7:37am
Points/Picas and Didots/Ciceros - Typographic Measurement Debate
0

Hi, we are currently working on a university project to create 2 contrasting ISTD journals on the typographic measurement debate, one issue being on points/picas and the other being on didots/ciceros. but issues must be contrasting and 32 pages long. However, we are struggling with research into this other than the obvious differences of size, nationality and age if anyone could point us in the right direction of some good articles discussions we would be very grateful.

HVB's picture
HVB
Offline
Joined: 17 Feb 2006 - 9:43am
0

Sounds as useful and as topical as a debate contrasting the cubit/palm system to yards/feet/inches.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Don't forget the Japanese "Q" system! It's the most rational one.

hhp

Nick Shinn's picture
Offline
Joined: 8 Jul 2003 - 11:00am
0
John Hudson's picture
Offline
Joined: 21 Dec 2002 - 11:00am
0

My clients Brill, the academic publishers in the Netherlands, use didot points to spec type. The most obvious impact of this was that using integer type sizes and leading results in a different visual proportion of interline spacing than corresponding Anglo-American points. I made my initial specimens interpreting their spec using Anglo-American points, and found the interline spacing too tight, but when I revised it to use didot points (by redefining the point scale in InDesign preferences), the result was better.

Bert Vanderveen's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Jun 2004 - 8:19am
0

The system proposed and introduced by Berthold (in the seventies, I think), and used by them for years until the demise of their photo-setting equipment business, was the most practical - based on SI-units: millimeters!

Too bad it never got to DIN-status.

Addendum: Or maybe it did. This article is not clear on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_typographic_units
Interesting that Otl Aicher was involved.

Another addendum: Discovered that the Japanese Q stands for quarter millimeter. Smart!
http://www.iol.ie/~sob/tm/index.xhtml

Question that remains: did the Japanese go metric before the Germans?

John Hudson's picture
Offline
Joined: 21 Dec 2002 - 11:00am
0

A base 10 system is grand for measuring things, but a base 12 system makes much more sense for developing proportional relationships. Seriously, a system that cannot express divisions by thirds except as repeating decimals is severely hampered in terms of proportional relationships.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Good point. So, even better:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexagesimal

hhp

Nick Curtis's picture
Offline
Joined: 21 Apr 2005 - 8:16am
0

Hrant,

Sexagesimal? Really? Not getting laid often enough?

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

What's often enough?
But actually, that's not a bug, that's a feature - I already have four kids.

hhp