Typography? Who knew?
As a person that prints out manuscripts (and puts together photocopied ‘zines) and mails them out, the idea of expressing professionalism through typesetting interests me. I’ve been pretty loyal to the Arial font for a good number of years now, unless the guidelines demand Courier. I don’t use standard Courier or Courier New, but Courier 10pt (you can find it online if you google, IIRC). Finding an elegant replacement for Arial would be nice.
As the sometimes editor of Hobson’s Choice, I found myself wanting the subs to come in Times New Roman (or similar) and double-spaced. I found myself cringing at the misuse of the various dashes. It made me wonder about what the people reading my work thought. As a very small-time operation without any street-cred, I couldn’t dismiss work based on these misgivings. Which made me wonder about whether or not the bigger publications do and if it had an effect on the editors reading my work.
The most reasonable conclusion I can come up with is that it has a marginal effect. If my work came to a tie, their work might win out by simply looking cleaner. Which could either be my strange over-analytical paranoia rearing it’s ugly head or the truth. I’m not sure, anymore.
Also, for those who have used whatever the newest incarnation of MS Office, doe anyone else not like the new default font Calibri? (I think that’s what it’s called – I use OpenOffice.Org at home.)
No related posts.
No Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL