The Typographer’s Curse: Automatic Leading

by Joel Friedlander on May 6, 2010 · 6 comments

Post image for The Typographer’s Curse: Automatic Leading

Let me tell you a story. One day long ago a couple of engineers sat around putting together the first piece of software that would help people lay out documents and do the work of graphic designers, right from their own desktop computer.

Do you think these engineers knew what the word “leading” meant? People who specify type know that leading is the space between the lines of type, measured from the baseline of one line (the imaginary line that the letters rest on) to the baseline of the next line.

No, wait, do you think they knew where the word “leading” came from? When type was set by hand, individual letters were picked up and placed in a little tray called a composing stick. You could stack the lines right on top of each other if you liked.

In typographic language, this is called “set solid.” It means, for instance, that you have 12 point type with one line every 12 points. If we were writing instructions for a typesetter we would write it like this: 12/12.

But suppose you wanted a little more space between the lines. You can’t change the little metal letters, so instead you cut thin pieces of lead to the length of the line of type line and slipped them between the lines. This also adds some structural stability to the page you’re typesetting. Instead of line after line of little bits of metal type stacked on top of each other, you have individual rows of type separated by thin sheets of lead.

If the leads you use are 1 point thick, (about 1/72 of an inch), then you now have “1 point leading,” or 12/13.

If you use two of those leads, or you get the compositor to cut you up a bunch of thicker leads, you would have 2 point leading, or 12/14.

Further Complications Arise

Okay, back to more recent history. What our engineers decided way back in the dawn of computer typesetting was this: since they couldn’t know what typeface you would be using, and they wanted to make sure your text was at least minimally readable, they would set the program so that at least you wouldn’t fail.

When you picked the size of your font in the software, the program itself would automatically add 20% of your font size to the leading.

For example, if you said you wanted 10 point Verdana, the software would give you 10 point Verdana with 12 points of leading (10/12).

Here’s the problem: 20% is okay for some type designs, at some sizes, but it’s an approximation at a median figure, which is likely to suit few actual examples.

Suppose, for instance, you had to rush to Macy’s to get some clothes for two cousins you’ve never met. You know that one is six feet tall and the other is five feet tall. When you get to the store, do you buy two sets of clothes, both for people who are five and a half feet tall? After all, that’s your cousins’ average height, isn’t it?

The Problem with Robots

thebookdesigner.com automatic leading typographers curse

Click to enlarge

This is the problem with automatic routines and robotic programs: they aim for some middle ground that’s likely to be only somewhat satisfying to the majority of users. Although they’re usually wrong. they aren’t all that wrong.


Let’s look at two real examples. In the accompanying graphic, you’ll see two sets of comparisons. In the larger type at the top, (Chaparral) the headline is set in 30 point. Adobe InDesign (which I used to typeset these samples) has inserted the usual 20% leading, resulting in type that is 30/36. The problem is the lines at this size are literally floating away from each other.


The second version has been set to solid leading, 30/30 and the whole thing hangs together much better. At least it looks a heck of a lot better to me.


In the smaller samples at the bottom of the page you can see two text-sized narrow columns. The first, in 11 point Janson, has received the usual 20% leading, which yields 11/13.2. It looks okay.


In the second sample the leading has been opened up to 11/15. One of the easiest ways to improve the readability of text is to slightly increase the amount of space between the lines. You can see the result here, the second sample looks a lot more readable to me. Imagine if this was a book page, where the line would be twice as long or longer.

Recommendations

If you want your typesetting to look more professional, don’t settle for the assumptions of the software engineers. Use the guidelines here when setting your type:

  • For headlines, tighten the leading until it’s too tight, then loosen it just enough to look good.
  • For body text, increase the leading a bit at a time to see where you get the most readable copy that still fits the parameters of your design.

Takeaway: Automatic leading is about as satisfying as a robot dog. Increase or decrease leading to make your document look more professional.

Be Sociable, Share!

    { 4 comments… read them below or add one }

    George Angus May 6, 2010 at 5:21 am

    Joel,

    Awesomely informative and interesting as usual!

    The site is looking terrific and I have to say your posts are the most educational one that show up in my inbox.

    I learn tons nearly every day, thanks kind sir.

    George

    Reply

    Joel Friedlander May 6, 2010 at 7:13 am

    Thanks, George, it’s great to have you as a reader. I’m pretty pleased with my “new suit of clothes” and hope it makes the info here easier to use.

    Reply

    Michael N. Marcus May 6, 2010 at 8:53 am

    By explaining the origin of “leading” you have probably helped people who were pronouncing it to rhyme with “breading” instead of “breeding.”

    There’s additional confusion in the newspaper business when referring to “the lead” (i.e., first) paragraph of a story or the first few sentences. It’s spelled artifically as “lede” to avoid confusion between the newsroom and the press room if someone sends a memo about trouble with the “lead.” A lede can have lead in it.

    When I was in eighth grade, every boy had a mandatory half-year class in “print shop” — even the kids who were heading to college. We used lead type (or wood type for big sizes) in composing sticks, and of course, we learned to hand-justify (MYSERY!) and insert leading.

    Most of us white-collar kids thought print shop was a waste of time. But my knowledge of fonts, justification, points, picas, em quads, en quads, kerning, ligatures, and leading turned out to be useful later on when I worked in ad agencies, designed websites, and now when I design my own books.

    OTOH, learning the layout of the California Job Case has been a complete waste of precious brain cells.

    While in college I took a course in Advertising Art Production at another college just so I could sit near a girl I was hot for. That course taught me about thumbnails, roughs, comps, pasteups, etc., and was a big help later on in business.

    One night I ended up in bed with the girl and the art professor. It’s in my book.

    ———–
    In other business: I’d like you to address the trend I call “the vanishing hyphen.” I’ve seen a lot of books recently (set both justified and rag-right), that use absolutely no hyphens. I think it’s ugly and wastes paper.

    Non-PDF eBooks shun hyphens to permit reflowing of the text when type size is changed by the person who is reading, but it can create some really ugly word spacing.

    Maybe we need e-readers that are smart enough to hyphenate. Unfortunately, MS Word often gets it wrong.

    Michael N. Marcus
    – Independent Self-Publishers Alliance, http://www.independentselfpublishers.org
    – “Become a Real Self-Publisher: Don’t be a Victim of a Vanity Press,” http://www.amazon.com/dp/0981661742
    – “Stories I’d Tell My Children (but maybe not until they’re adults),” http://www.amazon.com/dp/0981661750
    http://www.BookMakingBlog.blogspot.com
    http://www.SilverSandsBooks.com

    Reply

    Joel Friedlander May 6, 2010 at 6:50 pm

    Michael, I think you were pretty fortunate to have all that training, that probably wouldn’t happen today.

    And thanks for the hyphenation suggestion, I’ve put it on my list.

    Reply

    Leave a Comment


    + six = 11

    { 2 trackbacks }