Typesetting & Print Books Q&A

[LilyBLily]

I'm pretty sure my grandfather worked his way through law school as a linotyper. Or would that be linotypist? 

[LilyBLily]

That's logical, because the Linotype was a patented machine. He was a member of the Press Club (it was a clubby era), and he certainly knew how to type. So did George Bernard Shaw; possibly it was a "thing" at the turn of the 19th century. 

[okey dokey]

what are your stats so far?

- font
- size
- leading
etc

[okey dokey]

- font
- size
- leading

[Post-Doctorate D]

Is Varityper one of the ones you didn't remember?

[RPatton]

I'm putting together a guide for print for self publishers and I have so much appreciation for the typesetters (and designers), seriously, their advice and knowledge has been amazing in my dive into the rabbit hole that is designing a print book that could stand up against any traditionally published print book. I'm also thrilled to see you mention Sabon (even with the wide italics) and Bembo (with the pushy R). I wish Dante was on there though. However, it's good to see that 3 of the typefaces on your list are on my no-fail list (Garamond, Caslon, Electra, Baskerville, and Minion).

One reason I decided to do this project was because I was so sick and tired of people claiming conventions as rules and recommending typefaces like Times New Roman as being good typefaces for a novel. Not to mention claiming that a half inch margin was perfectly acceptable. But that there's so much information out there, but it's spread wide and far. My goal for the guide(s) is to give self publishers the information to publish print books that look professionally published and don't shout "this is self published!" in large neon letters. Like how to determine margins, font size, and leading while keeping readability as the priority.

But I totally digress.

Two questions.

Is 6x9 as common as people claim, or is its popularity due to POD printing and lowering the cost to print? (My theory is that it's popular with POD, not as much with traditional.)

Second question, some of the typefaces didn't make the transition to digitization very well; the strokes are too delicate for the presses, but does the quality of the POD printing make those same typefaces good for self publishers? From the poofs I've seen I think they do, but it's a low sample size in the best of circumstances.

Oh, and a third question... I literally salivate over the idea of using Trinite in a novel. I have the typeface in my library because I put together a memorial book for a family friend and when we were looking at different typefaces he fell in love with it too. (I used it as an extreme of what a beautiful typeface can do to the words on the page compared to the defaults - there are no ligatures because the typeface is so perfectly designed!) Do you think it has the readability to carry a novel without becoming too distracting. I really want to use it, but it sort of intimidates me that I won't do it justice.

[Post-Doctorate D]

Is Varityper one of the ones you didn't remember?

It's one I've been trying to forget. When I was in high school the owner of the small-town newspaper threw his Varityper in the trash barrel, then set it on fire.

Must have been an older model.  The one I used was a 4300P photo typesetter with the RIP software on a Macintosh SE/30.  It was used when we bought it in the 90s but we got several years of use out of it.

[Al Stevens]

Thank  you for posting this. It's one of my favorite sides to self-publishing.

I use Scribus, a free InDesign-type program, to typeset print editions. I learned about typesetting at a layman's level from Bringhurst's "The Elements of Typesetting Style," a wonderful book.

Some time back I was working on a self-publishing how-to book, but I shelved the project because 1) the market is glutted with such books, and 2) the process keeps changing and the book was already obsolete. I did complete a tutorial chapter on formatting a novel with Scribus.

I never published the book, but I use the chapter for all the values and procedures when I'm typesetting a novel. I don't do it often enough for the process to become second nature. I mentioned first in Absolute Write, then in KBoards that, if there was interest, I'd redo the chapter as a tutorial and publish it in my blog for free.

Nobody expressed the slightest interest in that. The majority argued that Word or Vellum does the job acceptably for them, and they wouldn't hear that a well-typeset book requires more hands- and eyes-on formatting than a program can possibly do by itself. So I didn't bother putting together a tutorial that nobody would use.

As a general observation, I find whenever a discussion turns to something complex that self-published writers might have to work at to learn, the answer is usually, "I'd rather spend my time writing."

[RPatton]

Dante is about 18 on the list, between Perpetua and Centaur. Bembo would be #2 if I combined it with Bembo Book, which is further down the list. Your no-fail list is pretty good. Baskerville was extremely popular in the 70s but Garamond is the new Baskerville. I have so far identified seven different Garamonds, eight if you include two weights of ITC Garamond.

Yeah, Baskerville is a bit dated, but the no-fail list consists of the typefaces I found hard to screw up. You might have to make some adjustments to line and word spacing, but for the most part the kerning pairs don't present gaping problems. My only real issues with the no-fail list is that with the exception of Electra, I think it lacks some of the character found in other typefaces, but those require a finer touch.

Times New Roman is #28 on the list. Times Roman (now called Times Ten) is a few notches higher, mainly because it's a Linotype face and what U.S. publishers were used to.

My issue isn't so much that Times is bad (it's not, it has everything a good typeface should have), it's the TNR that comes with the default for Word is the Monotype version and I think the Linotype version is better. It's a personal opinion, but I think there are so many better options available. Times isn't bad, just like Comic Sans isn't bad. It's how it's been used by people who aren't bothering to correct the problematic lines.

These are the reasons I give for why an author shouldn't use Times New Roman that comes with Word:

1. It’s a system default.
2. It was designed specifically for a London newspaper, The Times, that doesn’t even use it anymore.
3. It shouts self-published more than Amazon’s cover creator.
4. It’s a system default. (Yes, I know I mentioned this already.)
5. It’s a narrow typeface and specifically designed for narrow columns.
6. It’s a dull typeface.

Your theory is correct. Both IngramSpark and Createspace claim on their websites that 6x9 is the most popular size. That may be true for self-publishers, but it's quite rare for major publishers, except maybe genres such as SF. Note that I'm talking about trade paperbacks, not hardcovers. In order to not be biased in my survey I actually sought out 6x9 trade paperbacks, but most of what I found turned out to be paperback ARCs of the hardcover edition. I'm still counting, but currently 5.25x8 looks like the most popular size with 5.5x8.25 close behind. My guess as to why self-publishers use 6x9 is because they don't know any better and nearly every time it comes up on forums people start shouting "It's industry standard!" Most of the 6x9 trade paperbacks that I did find (other than, actually including the ARCs) were designed to the same standards as hardcovers--no ad cards in the front, two half titles, dedication, quotation, no reader guides or other junk in the back.

Yeah, 6x9 is great for a hardcover, but how many self-publishers are doing hardcovers as well as Trades? I prefer the 5.25 x 8 trim size myself, so I guess it's time to go back and add more editorial to the Choosing Your Trim chapter. As I said, I based my theory on assumptions and extrapolations, so I hedged my approach to the chapter, but I think I'll go back and push more for the 5 1/4" x 8" trim.

It's true that some of the old faces didn't make the original transition to digital very well, but that's changing. For most of the history of printing, a combination of ink, paper, and presswork resulted in considerable ink spread, hence the need to cut type with a finer stroke. It was the same in the early days of offset, but eventually science and technology won out. Over the years old digitizations have been improved and all-new faces have appeared, such as Janson Text, Sabon Next, Bembo Book, not only with a stronger stroke but other features as well. For example, Sabon Next abandoned the squished lowercase f since it no longer had to fit on a metal body.

I've also been collecting self-published books for my survey (most of which were 6x9) and it looks like in the early days of PoD the hairlines tended to break up more than they do now. Whether that's improvement in technology or presswork I don't know, but my latest novel was set in Adobe Garamond, which has a fairly fine stroke, and it looks pretty good on PoD cream paper. I also compared Monotype Garamond in one of my PoD books on white paper to a book using the same face printed by offset on white paper. The PoD version looks a bit darker.

Yeah, I've noticed the POD looking darker. Probably a combination of paper quality and ink. I used Danton in one book because I loved it in a traditionally published book and the typeface was just too dark. When I switched to typeface with thinner lines, it didn't feel as heavy on the page.

It's a beautiful face and would probably work well for a novel, depending on the genre. I downloaded a sample but it was bitmap so I can't really tell what it looks in print. Do they really charge $391 for one font?

Yeah, they do. But it's so worth it. I don't think the whole family is necessary, but no. 2 is great and I love the ascenders and descenders in no. 4. To be clear, I never would have access to the typeface if the purchase wasn't funded by the individual who I was helping. When you're doing a full-color book on high-quality paper usually found in art books, I don't think the cost of the typeface was a concern. He just didn't realize that there were so many typefaces available beyond system defaults or how the right typeface for a project could make the difference between an ordinary page and a beautiful page.

I think it would do well in Romance, Women's fiction, and fantasy. I don't think it would do as well in Sci-Fi, Action/Adventure, Horror, or Thrillers/Suspense.

[RPatton]

I use Scribus, a free InDesign-type program, to typeset print editions. I learned about typesetting at a layman's level from Bringhurst's "The Elements of Typesetting Style," a wonderful book.

Bringhurst's is good, but I think Felici has more practical information.

Some time back I was working on a self-publishing how-to book, but I shelved the project because 1) the market is glutted with such books, and 2) the process keeps changing and the book was already obsolete. I did complete a tutorial chapter on formatting a novel with Scribus.

The thing is, typesetting is based on conventions, so nothing is ever really obsolete, it's just evolving. Once someone has the base information, they are better informed to make better decisions. As for the glut, the books I found lacked anything practical for self publishers. The information is out there, it's just dispersed and not in one space.

Nobody expressed the slightest interest in that. The majority argued that Word or Vellum does the job acceptably for them, and they wouldn't hear that a well-typeset book requires more hands- and eyes-on formatting than a program can possibly do by itself. So I didn't bother putting together a tutorial that nobody would use.

Word does do a good job. You don't have as much fine-tune control as you'd have with InDesign or Scribus, or even Publisher, but it is a huge improvement compared to Vellum, which does an adequate job, but relies on automation. I can spot a Vellum made book a mile away with one eye closed, and for the most part the word spacing sends me into tizzy, not to mention the treatment of drop caps.

As a general observation, I find whenever a discussion turns to something complex that self-published writers might have to work at to learn, the answer is usually, "I'd rather spend my time writing."

It's all about how you present the information. My project started as a post on a forum and evolved into much bigger project than I anticipated. However, it's not as complex as it appears. It's more about giving people the tools to create a starting point. The thing is, you aren't going to sell anyone who isn't interested on why it's a good idea to have a well-designed book. If they're fine with Vellum, that's great, that's their prerogative. However, if they're interested in design or don't have Vellum, they'll jump at information giving them the conventions and tools to format a book that can sit on a shelf next to a professionally designed book and not look different. They might not win awards, but the readers will notice the difference.

[Post-Doctorate D]

Is Varityper one of the ones you didn't remember?

It's one I've been trying to forget. When I was in high school the owner of the small-town newspaper threw his Varityper in the trash barrel, then set it on fire.

Must have been an older model.  The one I used was a 4300P photo typesetter with the RIP software on a Macintosh SE/30.  It was used when we bought it in the 90s but we got several years of use out of it.

The Varitypers from the 50s and 60s were strike-on. Their phototypesetters came at a time when everyone and their brother was making a phototypesetter. Fortunately most of the shops I owned or worked in used equipment from the old-guard companies.

I've seen those in photos but never used one.

I looked ours up and it was a Varityper VT-4300P.  It was made when Varityper was owned by Tegra.  The software was from 1991, but I think the machine itself was 1989 or thereabouts.  I have the ReadMe file for the software and it says it will run on a Mac Plus or newer, so I guess we had a speed demon with the SE/30.  The software would even run on Apple's "new" System 7 software.  I think we used System 6 with it but I'm not sure.  Could have been 7.

My goal is to someday get one of the old Linotype machines and actually use it to set type to run on our letterpresses.

[Sam Kates]

Maybe I'm a glutton for punishment, but I've been researching it for a year and I'll publish my book in a few months. It's all about typesetting a book with Word, not InDesign, on the theory that writers already use Word and it's easier to take them another couple of steps than to start over with a completely different program. Word is perfectly capable of doing the work. It just needs to be prevented from doing everything for you. Typesetting for books hasn't changed all that much for more than 500 years, just the tools we use. The most popular typefaces used in books by major publishers today can be traced to a 20-year period in Venice at the end of the 15th Century. Typefaces, sizes, leading, line length, margins, book design, have evolved slowly over centuries.

I've looked at a few books on "formatting for print" and the advice they give is shocking. Clearly they never worked as a typesetter--they're just making stuff up.

My goal is to show self-publishers how to make their books look like the ones from major publishers and not a printed term paper, which is what most self-published books look like, even with Vellum, D2D, or any of the other "press a button and a book comes out" places.

As someone who wrestled with formatting six paperbacks with Word a few months back, and is pretty sure he didn't get everything as correct as he'd have liked to, I'll be seeking out your book when it's available.

[Post-Doctorate D]

Good luck with that. There aren't many left and most of them are in museums.

If I had had the space, I'd have one now.  We bought another piece of equipment from a guy who still had one.  He may not still have it by the time I have space and can afford it, but I keep my fingers crossed anyway.

[Al Stevens]

The thing is, typesetting is based on conventions, so nothing is ever really obsolete, it's just evolving. Once someone has the base information, they are better informed to make better decisions.

My comment on obsolescence was about the full book, which addressed the complete spectrum of self-publishing. The typesetting discussion was only one chapter.

As for the glut, the books I found lacked anything practical for self publishers. The information is out there, it's just dispersed and not in one space.

And with tens of thousands of titles, it's impossible to find the right one or two.

[Al Stevens]

Maybe I'm a glutton for punishment, but I've been researching it for a year and I'll publish my book in a few months. It's all about typesetting a book with Word, not InDesign, on the theory that writers already use Word...

I use OpenOffice or Word to format non-fiction titles, specifically how-tos. They are usually broken into many small paragraphs at several levels in the hierarchy. Those word processors are adequate for that. Maybe newer versions of Word can do all the horizontal and vertical tweaks for novel narratives, but I haven't seen it. But then, I'm a perfectionist.

I look forward to your book.

[Al Stevens]

The biggest problem with Word is word spacing. Word gets its default word space from the font--condensed fonts have a smaller default word space than expanded fonts. With previous versions (not sure when it changed) there was an option to "Word space like WordPerfect." That's no longer there. As far as I can tell, WordPerfect would, where necessary, reduce the minimum to make a line fit. Word no longer does that. The word space defined by the font is the absolute minimum. As a result, books justified by word have looser word spacing than by InDesign or other programs that provide more control.

And then there is character spacing, aka "tracking." Without that feature, the program is deficient for managing widows, orphans, rivers, excessive white space, and so on. Tracking is like "kerning" except that tracking operates on blocks of text rather than just two letters. Older versions of Word automatically kern but do not provide for tracking.


If Word doesn't support tracking, ladders, non-breaking spaces and hyphens, soft hyphens, and the like, it is, for me, useless for typography of a novel, memoir, any book with dense narrative. But to each their own.

[RPatton]

If Word doesn't support tracking, ladders, non-breaking spaces and hyphens, soft hyphens, and the like, it is, for me, useless for typography of a novel, memoir, any book with dense narrative. But to each their own.

Word does do tracking, it just doesn't call it that. It uses the same dialogue for both kerning and tracking. If you highlight a line, you can adjust the spacing across words or lines, just like you can with others. As far as non-breaking characters, I thought it also had those options, but I could be wrong.

I think the bigger point isn't whether it works for you specifically, but how it works for authors in general. Overall Word does the job head and shoulders above some of the automated software available. You might not be able to make finely-tuned adjustments with Word, but you can still produce a PDF that does fine for a print novel. I don't think I would use Word for any kind of complex layouts, but I feel more than comfortable suggesting authors use Word to format their books. I've even helped friends set up some basic templates they can reliably use to build new layouts on. Just because it's not my preferred tool doesn't mean it's complete rubbish.

[Al Stevens]

That's good news, Llano. Older versions of Word (I have 2002) don't seem to have those features. Lots of people use older versions because the new one requires a subscription and because they don't like the newer user interface. (I don't use Word for writing at all because its master document model has never worked.) Your book should explain which version(s) readers will need for each of the procedures you describe.


Given what you say, Word should be a reasonable substitute for inDesign, et al, for making print-ready PDFs for POD distributors. Readers need to know how to do all that tweaking, though, and your book will be a big help. At least for those who are willing to learn.


Let me know if you want a beta reader.

[Lynn]

Just let me know when the book is ready. I want this book. I love formatting my paperbacks but Word 2007 is my tool of choice. Word 2016 handles hyphenation a lot better and seems to space words better but I don't like it for other reasons. I have been borderline ready to switch to LibreOffice Writer for this formatting because of how it allows you to handle widows and orphans independently of one another (which Word doesn't) but I hate using Writer for this one thing when I already use Word for everything else.

So just get this book out so I can buy it. Thanks! :D

[Lynn]

Also, I do have a stats question. Have you noticed a change in font sizes and leading over the years? Basically, do the newer books skew one way or the other in your data set when it comes to font size and leading?

I keep hearing that sizes have gotten smaller and I'd love to know if it's true. I like using larger font sizes because I feel they're more readable to a wider range of people, so I tend to stick with 12 pt, but the truth is, it pushes up the length of my books, because I refuse to compromise on leading. I want a well-spaced text.

[Ghost]

Top Ten Typefaces used by the major U.S. publishers for fiction in the past 20 years:

1. Adobe Garamond
2. Sabon
3. Bembo
4. Granjon
5. Adobe Caslon
6. Janson Text
7. Electra
8. Fournier
9. Goudy Old Style
10. Simoncini Garamond


Type sizes from 100 paperbacks and 100 hardcovers, count in parens.

10 (13)
10.5 (26)
11 (65)
11.5 (55)
12 (30)
12.5 (7)
13 (3)
14 (1)

Leading values from 100 paperbacks and 100 hardcovers, count in parens.

12.5 (1)
13 (3)
13.5 (8)
14 (18)
14.5 (13)
15 (46)
15.5 (31)
16 (34)
16.5 (18)
17 (15)
17.5 (10)
18 (1)
18.5 (1)

Is there a source for this information floating around somewhere? I'd love to read more.

[LilyBLily]

We owned one or possibly two Varitypers in the 1950s-1960s. From time to time my father would hire a typist to use it. My self-publishing roots go way, way back.

[RPatton]

I think it's important to remind self publishers that trade paperbacks are not pocket or mass-market paperbacks. Trades have different conventions from mass-markets.

As far as font size, it shouldn't be about the point size, but about the x-height and the size of the ascenders and descenders and how they work on the page. Plus, some typefaces are actually larger at 10 pts than other typefaces at 12 pts. There are some typefaces I wouldn't set above 10 points (Baskerville 10) and others I wouldn't set lower than 12 points.

Llano, I think our projects probably share a lot of information, but both will fit nicely together in what really is a black hole in the market. The main difference is that you're coming from this with loads of experience, and I'm approaching it as someone who is completely self-taught.

[Tom Wood]

I really like the look of the Optima font for my upcoming cyberpunkish novels. It has an almost Asian flair to it, and the italics are very easy to read. (I have a heavy need for italics due to the story setup.) I found that I had to use the Optima Medium version because the Optima Roman version leaves tiny spaces at the tops and bottoms of  the letters O o C and c that made it hard to read. I know it's not commonly used for book interiors, but did you see it mentioned?

[RPatton]

I really like the look of the Optima font for my upcoming cyberpunkish novels. It has an almost Asian flair to it, and the italics are very easy to read. (I have a heavy need for italics due to the story setup.) I found that I had to use the Optima Medium version because the Optima Roman version leaves tiny spaces at the tops and bottoms of  the letters O o C and c that made it hard to read. I know it's not commonly used for book interiors, but did you see it mentioned?

If you like the look of Optima, look at Albertus. I think using a sans for prolonged reading isn't going to be as comfortable for the reader. It might not be the reason they put the book down, but it could be the reason they don't pick it back up again.

[Hopscotch]

Great discussion and I'll buy your book!  And not just for my paperbacks - did some letterpress a million years ago and so much enjoyed it I now want to letterpress chapbooks.

[Tom Wood]

I really like the look of the Optima font for my upcoming cyberpunkish novels. It has an almost Asian flair to it, and the italics are very easy to read. (I have a heavy need for italics due to the story setup.) I found that I had to use the Optima Medium version because the Optima Roman version leaves tiny spaces at the tops and bottoms of  the letters O o C and c that made it hard to read. I know it's not commonly used for book interiors, but did you see it mentioned?

I'm a Hermann Zapf fan. Optima is a beautiful typeface and I set lots of it back in the 70s and 80s, but I'd never use it for fiction, or any book for that matter. Despite the frequent claims by various groups to the contrary, sans serif typefaces are not well suited for text in books, especially fiction.

I've identified the typefaces for 1,000 novels and none of them use sans serif, other than a handful for inset material such as letters, text messages, etc.

Optima doesn't really have any hairlines so if it's breaking up on O and C there's something wrong. Are using the official Linotype font or a clone?

I'm using the version that Fonts.com supplies. I think it's the official Linotype. They have a system that lets you install a font and try it for an hour. I have some test text set up in InDesign so I can compare them. Exported to PDF and printed out on a big machine at Kinkos.


I'd like something with a 'futuristic' feel to it, and Optima fits that bill.


RPatton - I'll try Albertus, but the samples I've seen look very old-world. Not surprising, since it was intended to look like it was made using chisels!

[Tom Wood]

Thanks, I'll try those.


Llano, Texas? I lived in Austin for many years.

[Lynn]

I know what I think, but generally speaking, is Adobe Caslon 12 pt considered to be excessively large?  I love it and use it even in my 5 x 8 books, even though it means I have to be more careful with hyphenation and tracking (condense and expand in Word) so that my text looks nice when justified.

I just can't make myself back down on the size. I tried 11.5 and 11 pt in one extra-long book I wrote but it killed me to do it. The resulting text was perfectly fine, don't get me wrong, but I like the larger size. A lot. I had no choice really, though, because the book was going to be so long in 5 x 8, but reformatting the entire series for a larger trim is/was just not something I wanted to invest the time in.

(I really regret going with 5 x 8. It seemed like a good idea when I thought most of my books were going to be short or average length. But that's not what has happened in actuality and that size trim makes it so apparent that the lengths of some of the books in my series vary wildly.) I'm probably not the first or only self-publisher to realize something like this after the fact.

[RPatton]

I know what I think, but generally speaking, is Adobe Caslon 12 pt considered to be excessively large?  I love it and use it even in my 5 x 8 books, even though it means I have to be more careful with hyphenation and tracking (condense and expand in Word) so that my text looks nice when justified.

I just can't make myself back down on the size. I tried 11.5 and 11 pt in one extra-long book I wrote but it killed me to do it. The resulting text was perfectly fine, don't get me wrong, but I like the larger size. A lot. I had no choice really, though, because the book was going to be so long in 5 x 8, but reformatting the entire series for a larger trim is/was just not something I wanted to invest the time in.

(I really regret going with 5 x 8. It seemed like a good idea when I thought most of my books were going to be short or average length. But that's not what has happened in actuality and that size trim makes it so apparent that the lengths of some of the books in my series vary wildly.) I'm probably not the first or only self-publisher to realize something like this after the fact.

Try Adobe Caslon at 11/14 or alternatively, you could give King's Caslon a go, which has thicker strokes and some of the letters have a wider width. The characters might be the same x-height, but Kings Caslon appears slightly larger at 11 points than Adobe.


Because the measure in a 5ish x 8ish trade should have a smaller text area width, in order to keep the line length from seeming too short or margins too tight the font size should be appropriate. With the exception of narrow typefaces, 12 points will give you less characters per line, which isn't the worst of typographical faults, but over prolonged reading will become uncomfortable for the reader.

[Lynn]

I decided I was happy with 50-60 characters for average line length when I set it up, so despite everything, it looks like I'm good, even by the math. Maybe on the short end of the range of acceptable by the standards you mention, but definitely acceptable. Most of my lines are 52+ characters long, averaging mostly in the middle at 54-56. (I double checked, because why ask for advice if you're not going to use it!)

[Lynn]

It's another reason why I regret the 5 x 8 though. Any new series I start will use a bigger trim size so the 12 pt will be a better fit.

Thanks for answering my questions.

[Lynn]

I might do something similar with hardcovers. I like a bigger hardcover and that sounds like a good plan.

I did one series under a pen name in 5.5 x 8.5 and really love it. I'm going that route for future trade paperbacks. I measured what felt like tons of books and it was the closest to my collection of trade paperbacks in that genre and once I had it in hand, I just really liked how it felt and how it worked for the two book lengths I used it for, approx. 57,000 and 77,000 words. So, for the future, this is the trim for me, but not for any of my ongoing series, at least not unless I do another edition and decide to just offer both sizes. Which I have actually considered. It might be a little weird, but I'm my own publisher and I get to do what I want. I just haven't wanted to do the work for it yet.

[Tom Wood]

I really like the look of the Optima font for my upcoming cyberpunkish novels. It has an almost Asian flair to it, and the italics are very easy to read. (I have a heavy need for italics due to the story setup.) I found that I had to use the Optima Medium version because the Optima Roman version leaves tiny spaces at the tops and bottoms of  the letters O o C and c that made it hard to read. I know it's not commonly used for book interiors, but did you see it mentioned?

I'm a Hermann Zapf fan. Optima is a beautiful typeface and I set lots of it back in the 70s and 80s, but I'd never use it for fiction, or any book for that matter. Despite the frequent claims by various groups to the contrary, sans serif typefaces are not well suited for text in books, especially fiction.

I've identified the typefaces for 1,000 novels and none of them use sans serif, other than a handful for inset material such as letters, text messages, etc.

Optima doesn't really have any hairlines so if it's breaking up on O and C there's something wrong. Are using the official Linotype font or a clone?

Just to clarify, it was the italics version of Optima Roman that breaks at the rounds, even at 11 and 12 point.

[Tom Wood]

I'm working in InDesign for the print versions. I invariably end up with paragraphs that are three lines long that hit at the bottom of a page. So it splits into a single line at the bottom of one page, and two lines at the top of the next, or vice versa - two and one. If the lines are nearly full length, no amount of kerning tracking or word space adjustments will get the paragraph down to two lines. I've been moving the entire paragraph to the next page, but that leaves a tall margin at the bottom of the page before it. What do you do with that situation?

[Al Stevens]

I'm working in InDesign for the print versions. I invariably end up with paragraphs that are three lines long that hit at the bottom of a page. So it splits into a single line at the bottom of one page, and two lines at the top of the next, or vice versa - two and one. If the lines are nearly full length, no amount of kerning or word space adjustments will get the paragraph down to two lines. I've been moving the entire paragraph to the next page, but that leaves a tall margin at the bottom of the page before it. What do you do with that situation?

It happens. I go back page by page within the chapter, looking for a paragraph where a tracking adjustment to the entire paragraph will pull the following text up or push it down one line. Usually that paragraph will have a last line nearly to the right margin or one with a short last word by itself on the final line of the paragraph. When you pull or push a line anywhere, all the lines that follow in the chapter are similarly adjusted.


The correction, of course must not mess up any other page breaks between itself and the text you are trying to pull  up or push down.


I hope that makes sense.



Keep in mind that facing pages that do not include the last page of the chapter should have the same bottom margin.

[Tom Wood]

Thank you! Yes - tracking. Now I see how that works to lengthen or shorten a prior paragraph to help with this issue.

[elleoco]

Call me a heathen. I used a smaller size for my first paperbacks. When I had a really long novel, admittedly because of price to reader, I did it in 6 x 9 and liked it so much better I switched to that for everything after. So my readers are stuck with my preference, although there have been no complaints. Maybe it's because of my age, but after years of Kindle, I find reading traditionally published paperbacks uncomfortable - type too small, margin too small, books of any length fight opening wide enough unless you break the spine.


If I wanted my books to look more like "real" paperbacks, IMO they'd have to be more like 4 x 7 anyway.

[Tom Wood]

Contrary to popular belief, there's no rule that says the first line of a paragraph cannot appear alone at the bottom of the page, and major U.S. publishers don't use any such rule. First lines routinely appear at the bottom of the page. There's no need to move the first line of a three-line paragraph to the next page. ...

Well that makes it easier!

[Al Stevens]

Tracking is one way to adjust page breaks without affecting page line counts, and as long as you use a small adjustment value, it is not noticeable. It also helps to eliminate rivers.

I'm a stickler for every full page in a book having the same bottom margin. But that's just me. So deleting lines doesn't always work for me.

I typically use tracking to pull up when the last word or three of a paragraph is at the top of the next page and when the last line of the chapter is at the top of its last page. Also when hyphenated words break pages.
Some publishers allow that and some don't.
We went without a lot of tools for hundreds of years. (Well, not you and me.) That's no reason not to use them.
Whatever works for you...

[Al Stevens]

Tracking is vandalism, pure and simple.

That's why all the major typesetting programs include the feature?

[Al Stevens]

Typesetting programs are written by programmers, not typesetters.

Right. What do we know? We're not advising writers to typeset with Word.