Misplaced Pages

Typographic unit: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:02, 13 March 2004 editBobblewik (talk | contribs)66,026 edits typo: milimetre -> millimetre← Previous edit Latest revision as of 09:25, 20 September 2024 edit undoRemsense (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Template editors59,292 edits See also: not WP:SEEAGAIN 
(139 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Units of measurement}}
'''Typographic units''' are different from common ] units, as they were established earlier. In Europe, the Didot point system was created by François-Ambroise Didot (1730–1804) in c. 1783. Didot’s system was based on Pierre Simon Fournier’s (1712–1768), but Didot modified Fournier’s by adjusting the base unit precisely to a French Royal inch (''pouce''), as Fournier’s unit had not conformed precisely to any standard unit.
{{More footnotes|date=June 2023}}
{| style="float: right; border: 1px solid #BBB"
| style="width: 220px;" | ] ]
|-
| A ruler showing 4 scales (from the top down): ]es, ], ]s, and ]
|}


]
]
'''Typographic units''' are the units of measurement used in ] or ]. Traditional ] units are different from familiar ] units because they were established in the early days of printing. Though most printing is digital now, the old terms and units have persisted.


Even though these units are all very small, across a line of print they add up quickly. Confusions such as resetting text originally in type of one unit in type of another will result in words moving from one line to the next, resulting in all sorts of typesetting errors (viz. ], ], disrupted tables, and misplaced captions). Before the popularization of ], type measurements were done with a tool called a ].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Radics |first1=Vilmos |last2=Ritter |first2=Aladár |year=1984 |title=Make-up and typography |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yx3sAAAAMAAJ |access-date=25 November 2016|language=English |publisher=International Organization of Journalists |page=13 |isbn=9789630231367 |quote=The typometer is an instrument for measuring typographical denominations: type sizes, column width and depth, slugs, type area, etc.}}</ref>
(Fournier&rsquo;s printed scale of his point system, from ''Manuel Typographique,'' Barbou, Paris 1764, enlarged)


== Development ==
However, the basic idea of the point system &ndash; to generate different type sizes by multiplying a single minimum unit calculated by dividing a base measurement unit such as one French Royal inch &ndash; was not Didot&rsquo;s invention, but Fournier&rsquo;s.&sup1;
In Europe, the Didot point system was created by ] (1730–1804) in c. 1783. Didot's system was based on ]'s (1712–1768), but Didot modified Fournier's by adjusting the base unit precisely to a ], as Fournier's unit was based on a less common foot.
In Fournier&rsquo;s system, an approximate French Royal inch (''pouce'') is divided by 12 to calculate 1 ''ligne,'' which is then divided by 6 to get 1 point. Didot just made the base unit (one French Royal inch) identical to the standard value defined by the then government.


]
''In Didot&rsquo;s point system:''
*1 point = 1/6 ''ligne'' = 1/72 French Royal inch = 1082797949/2880000000 mm = approx. 0.3759 mm


(Fournier's printed scale of his point system, from ''Manuel Typographique'', Barbou, Paris 1764, enlarged)
Both in Didot&rsquo;s and Fournier&rsquo;s systems, some point sizes have traditional names such as ''Cicero'' (before introduction of point systems, type sizes were called by names such as ''Cicero,'' Pica, Ruby, Long Primer, etc).


However, the basic idea of the point system – to generate different type sizes by multiplying a single minimum unit calculated by dividing a base measurement unit such as one French Royal inch – was not Didot's invention, but Fournier's.<ref group="note">
*1 ''cicero'' = 12 Didot points = 1/6 French Royal inch = 1082797949/240000000 mm = approx. 4.5117 mm
Actually, Sebastien Truchet (1657–1729) had invented a similar type sizing system before Fournier implemented his point system. Truchet's system was applied to the types of the Imprimerie Royale, the ''romains du roi''. It is thought that Fournier knew about Truchet's scheme that was based on the standard French Royal inch and a very fine unit of <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>204</sub> '']''. For further information on Truchet's system, refer to James Mosley's "The New Type Bodies of the Imprimerie Royale", pp. 400–408, Vol. 3, ''The Manuel Typographique of Pierre-Simon Fournier'' le jeune, Darmstadt 1995. and Jacques André's "Truchet & Types" .
</ref> In Fournier's system, an approximate French Royal inch (''pouce'') is divided by 12 to calculate 1 ''ligne'', which is then divided by 6 to get 1 point. Didot just made the base unit (one French Royal inch) identical to the standard value defined by the government.


The Didot point system has been widely used in European countries. ''In Didot's point system:''
*1 ] = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>6</sub> '']'' = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>72</sub> ] = <sup>15&nbsp;625</sup>⁄<sub>41&nbsp;559</sub>&nbsp;mm <small>≤</small>&nbsp;0.375&nbsp;971&nbsp;510&nbsp;4&nbsp;mm, however in practice mostly: 0.376&nbsp;mm (i.e. + 0.0076%).


Both in Didot's and Fournier's systems, some point sizes have ] such as '']'' (before introduction of point systems, type sizes were called by names such as ''Cicero'', '']'', '']'', '']'', etc.).
In Great Britain and the U. S. A., many proposals for type size standardization had been made by the end of 19th century (such as Bruce Typefoundry&rsquo;s mathematical system that was based on a precise geometric progression). However, no nation-wide standard was created until the American Point System was decided in 1886.


*1 ''cicero'' = 12 Didot points = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>6</sub> French Royal inch = <sup>62&nbsp;500</sup>⁄<sub>13&nbsp;853</sub>&nbsp;mm <small>≤</small>&nbsp;4.511&nbsp;658&nbsp;124&nbsp;6&nbsp;mm, also in practice mostly: 4.512&nbsp;mm (i.e. + 0.0076%).
The American Point System was proposed by Nelson C. Hawks of Marder Luse & Company in Chicago in the 1870s, and his point system used the same method of size division as Fournier&rsquo;s; viz. dividing 1 inch by 6 to get 1 pica, and dividing it again by 12 to get 1 point. However, the American Point System standardized finally in 1886 is different from Hawks&rsquo; original idea in that 1 pica is not precisely equal to 1/6 inch (Imperial or American/British inch), as the United States Type Founders&rsquo; Association defined the standard pica to be the Johnson Pica which had been adopted and used by Mackellar, Smiths and Jordan type foundry (MS&J), Philadelphia. As MS&J was very influential in those days, many other type foundries were using the Johnson Pica.&sup2; Also, MS&J defined that 83 Picas are equal to 35 centimeters.


The Didot point system has been widely used in European countries. An abbreviation for it that these countries use is "dd", employing an old method for indicating plurals. Hence "12&nbsp;dd" means twelve didot points.
The Johnson Pica was named after Lawrence Johnson who had succeeded Binny & Ronaldson in 1833. Binny & Ronaldson was one of the oldest type foundries in the United States, established in Philadelphia in 1796. Binny & Ronaldson had bought the type founding equipment of Benjamin Franklin&rsquo;s (1706&ndash;1790) type foundry established in 1786 and run by his grandson Benjamin Franklin Bache (1769&ndash;1798). The equipment is thought to be that which Benjamin Franklin purchased from Pierre Simon Fournier when he visited France for diplomatic purposes (1776&ndash;1785).


In Britain and the United States, many proposals for type size standardization had been made by the end of 19th century (such as Bruce Typefoundry's mathematical system that was based on a precise geometric progression). However, no nationwide standard was created until the American Point System was decided in 1886.
''In the American Point System:''
*1 pica = 35/83 centimeters = approx. 0.1660 ]
*1 point = 1/12 pica = 175/498 mm = approx. 0.3514 mm


The American Point System was proposed by Nelson C. Hawks of ] in Chicago in the 1870s, and his point system used the same method of size division as Fournier's; viz. dividing 1&nbsp;] by 6 to get 1 ], and dividing it again by 12 to get 1 point. However, the American Point System standardized finally in 1886 is different from Hawks' original idea in that 1 pica is not precisely equal to <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>6</sub> ] (neither the Imperial inch nor the US inch), as the United States Type Founders' Association defined the standard pica to be the Johnson Pica, which had been adopted and used by Mackellar, Smiths and Jordan type foundry (MS&J), Philadelphia. As MS&J was very influential in those days, many other type foundries were using the Johnson Pica.<ref group="note"> Regarding the background of the adoption of the Johnson Pica, Mr. Richard L. Hopkins, author of ''Origin of The American Point System'' says: "The major issue then was the expense involved in re-tooling literally hundreds of molds in each foundry to make them all conform to the new system. If they could avoid just a few sizes being altered, it would save hundreds of thousands of dollars. That is why the MS&J (Johnson) pica was adopted."
The American Point System has been used in the U.S.A., Great Britain and many other countries including Japan.
</ref> Also, MS&J defined that 83 Picas are equal to 35 centimeters. The choice of the ] unit for the prototype was because at the time the Imperial and US inches differed in size slightly, and neither country could legally specify a unit of the other.


The Johnson Pica was named after ] who had succeeded ] in 1833. Binny & Ronaldson was one of the oldest type foundries in the United States, established in Philadelphia in 1796. Binny & Ronaldson had bought the type founding equipment of Benjamin Franklin's (1706–1790) type foundry established in 1786 and run by his grandson Benjamin Franklin Bache (1769–1798). The equipment is thought to be that which Benjamin Franklin purchased from Pierre Simon Fournier when he visited France for diplomatic purposes (1776–85).
Today, digital printing and display devices and page layout softwares are using a unit that is different from these traditional typographic units. On many digital printing systems (desk-top publishing systems in particular), the following equations are applicable (with exceptions).


The official standard approved by the Fifteenth Meeting of the Type Founders Association of the United States in 1886 was this Johnson pica, equal to exactly 0.166&nbsp;inch.{{citation needed|date=September 2023}} Therefore, the two other – very close – definitions, 1200&nbsp;/&nbsp;7227&nbsp;inch and 350&nbsp;/&nbsp;83&nbsp;mm, are both unofficial{{citation needed|date=September 2023}}.
*1 pica = 1/6 inch (British/American inch of today)
*1 point = 1/12 pica = 1/72 inch = 127/360 mm = approx. 0.3528 mm


Monotype wedges used in England and America were based on a pica = .1660&nbsp;inch. But on the European continent all available wedges were based on the "old-pica" 1 pica - .1667&nbsp;inch. These wedges were marked with an extra E behind the numbers of the wedge and the set. These differences can also be found in the tables of the manuals.
You can see that Fournier&rsquo;s original method of division is restored in today&rsquo;s digital typography. This seems to prove the timeless value of Fournier&rsquo;s invention.


''In the American point system:''
== Notes ==
*1 Johnson pica = exactly 0.166&nbsp;inch ''(versus 0.16<span style="text-decoration: overline">6</span> = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>6</sub>&nbsp;inch for the DTP-pica)'' = 4.2164&nbsp;mm.
*1 point = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>12</sub> pica = exactly 0.013&nbsp;8<span style="text-decoration: overline">3</span> inch = 0.351&nbsp;3<span style="text-decoration: overline">6</span>&nbsp;mm.


The American point system has been used in the US, Britain, Japan, and many other countries.
::&sup1; Actually, Sebastien Truchet (1657&ndash;1729) had invented a similar type sizing system before Fournier implemented his point system. Truchet&rsquo;s system was applied to the types of the Imperiemerie Royal, the ''romains du roi.'' It is thought that Fournier knew about Truchet&rsquo;s scheme that was based on the standard French Royal inch and a very fine unit of 1/204 ''ligne.'' For further information on Truchet&rsquo;s sytem, refer to James Mosley&rsquo;s &ldquo;The New Type Bodies of the Imprimerie Royale&rdquo;, pp. 400&ndash;408, Vol. 3, ''The Manuel Typographique of Pierre-Simon Fournier'' le jeune, Darmstadt 1995. and Jacques Andr&eacute;'s &ldquo;Truchet & Types&rdquo; (http://www.irisa.fr/faqtypo/truchet/truchet1E.html).


Today, digital printing and display devices and page layout software use a unit that is different from these traditional typographic units. On many digital printing systems (desktop publishing systems in particular), the following equations are applicable (with exceptions, most notably the popular ] typesetting system and its derivatives<ref name=LaTeX/Length>]</ref>).
::&sup2; Regarding the background of the adoption of the Johnson Pica, Mr. Richard L. Hopkins, author of ''Origin of The American Point System'' says: &ldquo;The major issue then was the expense involved in re-tooling literally hundreds of molds in each foundry to make them all conform to the new system. If they could avoid just a few sizes being altered, it would save hundreds of thousands of dollars. That is why the MS&J (Johnson) pica was adopted.&rdquo;


*1 pica = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>6</sub>&nbsp;inch (British/American inch of today) = 4.23<span style="text-decoration: overline">3</span>&nbsp;mm.
== Metric Units ==
*1 point = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>12</sub> pica = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>72</sub> inch = <sup>127</sup>⁄<sub>360</sub>&nbsp;mm = 0.352<span style="text-decoration: overline">7</span>&nbsp;mm.


Digital displays and printing led to the use an additional unit:
The traditional typographic units are based either on non-metric units, or on odd multiples (such as 35/83) of a metric unit. There are no specifically metric units for this particular purpose, although there is a DIN standard sometimes used in German publishing, which measures type sizes in multiples of 0.25 mm, and proponents of the metrication of typography generally recommend the use of the millimetre for typographical measurements, rather than the development of new specifically typographical metric units.


*1 ] = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>20</sub> point = <sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>1440</sub> inch = <sup>127</sup>⁄<sub>7200</sub>&nbsp;mm = 0.017&nbsp;63<span style="text-decoration: overline">8</span>&nbsp;mm.
== Select Bibliography ==


Fournier's original method of division is now restored in today's digital typography.{{citation needed|date=September 2019}}
*Boag, Andrew. &ldquo;Typographic measurement: a chronology&rdquo;, ''Typography papers,'' no. 1, 1996, The Department of Typography and Graphic Communication, The University of Reading, Reading 1996.

*Bruce&rsquo;s Son & Company, ''Specimen of Printing Types,'' incl. Theo. L. DeVinne&rsquo;s &ldquo;The Invention of Printing&rdquo;, New York 1878.
Comparing a piece of type in didots for Continental European countries – 12&nbsp;dd, for example – to a piece of type for an English-speaking country – 12&nbsp;pt – shows that the main body of a character is actually about the same size. The difference is that the languages of the former often need extra space atop the capital letters for accent marks (e.g. Ñ, Â, Ö, É), but English rarely needs this.
*Carter, Harry. ''Fournier on Typefounding,'' The Soncino Press, London 1930.

== Metric units ==
{{main|Metric typographic units}}

The traditional typographic units are based either on non-metric units, or on odd multiples (such as <sup>35</sup>⁄<sub>83</sub>) of a metric unit. There are no specifically metric units for this particular purpose, although there is a DIN standard sometimes used in German publishing, which measures type sizes in multiples of 0.25&nbsp;mm, and proponents of the metrication of typography generally recommend the use of the millimetre for typographical measurements, rather than the development of new specifically typographical metric units. The Japanese already do this for their own characters (using the ''kyu'', which is ''q'' in romanized Japanese and is also 0.25&nbsp;mm), and have metric-sized type for European languages as well. One advantage of the q is that it reintroduces the proportional integer division of 3&nbsp;mm (12&nbsp;q) by 6 & 4.

During the age of the French Revolution or Napoleonic Empire, the French established a typographic unit of 0.4&nbsp;mm, but except for the government's print shops, this did not catch on.

In 1973, the ''didot'' was restandardized in the ] as 0.375 (= <sup>3</sup>⁄<sub>8</sub>)&nbsp;mm.{{citation needed|date=October 2020}} Care must be taken because the name of the unit is often left unmodified. The Germans, however, use the terms Fournier-Punkt and Didot-Punkt for the earlier ones, and Typografischer Punkt for this metric one. The TeX typesetting system uses the abbreviation dd for the earlier definition, and nd for the metric ''new didot''<ref name="LaTeX/Length"/>

== Notes ==
<references group="note" />

== Select bibliography ==
*Boag, Andrew. "Typographic measurement: a chronology", ''Typography papers'', no. 1, 1996, The Department of Typography and Graphic Communication, The University of Reading, Reading 1996.
*Bruce's Son & Company, ''Specimen of Printing Types'', incl. Theo. L. DeVinne's "The Invention of Printing", New York 1878.
*Carter, Harry. ''Fournier on Typefounding'', The Soncino Press, London 1930.
*Fournier, Pierre Simon, ''The Manuel Typographique of Pierre-Simon Fournier'' le jeune, Vols. I&ndash;III, Ed. by James Mosley, Darmstadt 1995. *Fournier, Pierre Simon, ''The Manuel Typographique of Pierre-Simon Fournier'' le jeune, Vols. I&ndash;III, Ed. by James Mosley, Darmstadt 1995.
*Fournier, Pierre Simon. ''Mod&egrave;les des Caract&egrave;res de l&rsquo;Imprimerie,'' including James Mosley&rsquo;s introduction, Eugrammia Press, London 1965. *Fournier, Pierre Simon. ''Modèles des Caractères de l'Imprimerie'', including James Mosley's introduction, Eugrammia Press, London 1965.
*Fournier, Pierre Simon. ''Manuel Typographique,'' Vols. I & II, Fournier & Barbou, Paris 1764&ndash;1766. *Fournier, Pierre Simon. ''Manuel Typographique'', Vols. I & II, Fournier & Barbou, Paris 1764&ndash;1766.
*Hansard, T. C. ''Typographia,'', Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy, London 1825. *Hansard, T. C. ''Typographia'', Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy, London 1825.
*Hopkins, Richard L. ''Origin of The American Point System,'' Hill & Dale Private Press, Terra Alta 1976. *Hopkins, Richard L. ''Origin of The American Point System'', Hill & Dale Private Press, Terra Alta 1976.
*Hutt, Allen. ''Fournier, the compleat typographer,'' Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa, NJ 1972. *]. ''Fournier, the complete typographer'', Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa, NJ 1972.
*Johnson, John. ''Typographia,'' Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, Brown & Green, London 1824. *Johnson, John. ''Typographia'', Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, Brown & Green, London 1824.
*Jones, Thomas Roy, ''Printing in America'', The Newcomen Society of England, American Branch, New York 1948, *Jones, Thomas Roy, ''Printing in America'', The Newcomen Society of England, American Branch, New York 1948.
*MacKellar Smiths & Jordan. ''One Hundred Years'', Philadelphia 1896. *MacKellar Smiths & Jordan. ''One Hundred Years'', Philadelphia 1896.
*Mosley, James. &ldquo;French Academicians and Modern Typography: Designing New Types in the 1690s&rdquo;, ''Typography papers,'' no. 2, 1997, The Department of Typography and Graphic Communication, The University of Reading, Reading 1997. *Mosley, James. "French Academicians and Modern Typography: Designing New Types in the 1690s", ''Typography papers'', no. 2, 1997, The Department of Typography and Graphic Communication, The University of Reading, Reading 1997.
*Moxon, Joseph. ''Mechanick Exercises On The Whole Art Of Printing,'' Oxford University Press, London 1958. *Moxon, Joseph. ''Mechanick Exercises On The Whole Art Of Printing'', Oxford University Press, London 1958.
*Ovink, G. Willem. &ldquo;From Fournier to metric, and from lead to film&rdquo;, ''Quaerendo,'' Volume IX 2 & 4, Theatrum Orbis Terrarum Ltd., Amsterdam 1979. *Ovink, G. Willem. "From Fournier to metric, and from lead to film", '']'', Volume IX 2 & 4, Theatrum Orbis Terrarum Ltd., Amsterdam 1979.
*Smith, John. ''The Printer&rsquo;s Grammar,'' L. Wayland, London 1787. *Smith, John. ''The Printer's Grammar'', L. Wayland, London 1787.
*Yamamoto, Taro. ''pt &ndash; Type Sizing Units Converter,'' http://www.kt.rim.or.jp/~tyamamot/pt.htm Tokyo 2001. *Yamamoto, Taro. ''pt &ndash; Type Sizing Units Converter'', http://www.kt.rim.or.jp/~tyamamot/pt.htm Tokyo 2001.

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
*
*
*

{{Typography terms}}
{{Authority control}}


]
== Related topics ==
]


]
*]
]

Latest revision as of 09:25, 20 September 2024

Units of measurement
This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (June 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
A ruler showing 4 scales (from the top down): Inches, Points, Picas, and Agates
Diagram of font metrics showing where letters and symbols would be placed relative to each other. The letters would change size according to the font type, typographic unit and dimension used.

Typographic units are the units of measurement used in typography or typesetting. Traditional typometry units are different from familiar metric units because they were established in the early days of printing. Though most printing is digital now, the old terms and units have persisted.

Even though these units are all very small, across a line of print they add up quickly. Confusions such as resetting text originally in type of one unit in type of another will result in words moving from one line to the next, resulting in all sorts of typesetting errors (viz. rivers, widows and orphans, disrupted tables, and misplaced captions). Before the popularization of desktop publishing, type measurements were done with a tool called a typometer.

Development

In Europe, the Didot point system was created by François-Ambroise Didot (1730–1804) in c. 1783. Didot's system was based on Pierre Simon Fournier's (1712–1768), but Didot modified Fournier's by adjusting the base unit precisely to a French Royal inch (pouce), as Fournier's unit was based on a less common foot.

(Fournier's printed scale of his point system, from Manuel Typographique, Barbou, Paris 1764, enlarged)

However, the basic idea of the point system – to generate different type sizes by multiplying a single minimum unit calculated by dividing a base measurement unit such as one French Royal inch – was not Didot's invention, but Fournier's. In Fournier's system, an approximate French Royal inch (pouce) is divided by 12 to calculate 1 ligne, which is then divided by 6 to get 1 point. Didot just made the base unit (one French Royal inch) identical to the standard value defined by the government.

In Didot's point system:

  • 1 point = ⁄6 ligne = ⁄72 French Royal inch = ⁄41 559 mm  0.375 971 510 4 mm, however in practice mostly: 0.376 mm (i.e. + 0.0076%).

Both in Didot's and Fournier's systems, some point sizes have traditional names such as Cicero (before introduction of point systems, type sizes were called by names such as Cicero, Pica, Ruby, Great Primer, etc.).

  • 1 cicero = 12 Didot points = ⁄6 French Royal inch = ⁄13 853 mm  4.511 658 124 6 mm, also in practice mostly: 4.512 mm (i.e. + 0.0076%).

The Didot point system has been widely used in European countries. An abbreviation for it that these countries use is "dd", employing an old method for indicating plurals. Hence "12 dd" means twelve didot points.

In Britain and the United States, many proposals for type size standardization had been made by the end of 19th century (such as Bruce Typefoundry's mathematical system that was based on a precise geometric progression). However, no nationwide standard was created until the American Point System was decided in 1886.

The American Point System was proposed by Nelson C. Hawks of Marder Luse & Company in Chicago in the 1870s, and his point system used the same method of size division as Fournier's; viz. dividing 1 inch by 6 to get 1 pica, and dividing it again by 12 to get 1 point. However, the American Point System standardized finally in 1886 is different from Hawks' original idea in that 1 pica is not precisely equal to ⁄6 inch (neither the Imperial inch nor the US inch), as the United States Type Founders' Association defined the standard pica to be the Johnson Pica, which had been adopted and used by Mackellar, Smiths and Jordan type foundry (MS&J), Philadelphia. As MS&J was very influential in those days, many other type foundries were using the Johnson Pica. Also, MS&J defined that 83 Picas are equal to 35 centimeters. The choice of the metric unit for the prototype was because at the time the Imperial and US inches differed in size slightly, and neither country could legally specify a unit of the other.

The Johnson Pica was named after Lawrence Johnson who had succeeded Binny & Ronaldson in 1833. Binny & Ronaldson was one of the oldest type foundries in the United States, established in Philadelphia in 1796. Binny & Ronaldson had bought the type founding equipment of Benjamin Franklin's (1706–1790) type foundry established in 1786 and run by his grandson Benjamin Franklin Bache (1769–1798). The equipment is thought to be that which Benjamin Franklin purchased from Pierre Simon Fournier when he visited France for diplomatic purposes (1776–85).

The official standard approved by the Fifteenth Meeting of the Type Founders Association of the United States in 1886 was this Johnson pica, equal to exactly 0.166 inch. Therefore, the two other – very close – definitions, 1200 / 7227 inch and 350 / 83 mm, are both unofficial.

Monotype wedges used in England and America were based on a pica = .1660 inch. But on the European continent all available wedges were based on the "old-pica" 1 pica - .1667 inch. These wedges were marked with an extra E behind the numbers of the wedge and the set. These differences can also be found in the tables of the manuals.

In the American point system:

  • 1 Johnson pica = exactly 0.166 inch (versus 0.166 = ⁄6 inch for the DTP-pica) = 4.2164 mm.
  • 1 point = ⁄12 pica = exactly 0.013 83 inch = 0.351 36 mm.

The American point system has been used in the US, Britain, Japan, and many other countries.

Today, digital printing and display devices and page layout software use a unit that is different from these traditional typographic units. On many digital printing systems (desktop publishing systems in particular), the following equations are applicable (with exceptions, most notably the popular TeX typesetting system and its derivatives).

  • 1 pica = ⁄6 inch (British/American inch of today) = 4.233 mm.
  • 1 point = ⁄12 pica = ⁄72 inch = ⁄360 mm = 0.3527 mm.

Digital displays and printing led to the use an additional unit:

  • 1 twip = ⁄20 point = ⁄1440 inch = ⁄7200 mm = 0.017 638 mm.

Fournier's original method of division is now restored in today's digital typography.

Comparing a piece of type in didots for Continental European countries – 12 dd, for example – to a piece of type for an English-speaking country – 12 pt – shows that the main body of a character is actually about the same size. The difference is that the languages of the former often need extra space atop the capital letters for accent marks (e.g. Ñ, Â, Ö, É), but English rarely needs this.

Metric units

Main article: Metric typographic units

The traditional typographic units are based either on non-metric units, or on odd multiples (such as ⁄83) of a metric unit. There are no specifically metric units for this particular purpose, although there is a DIN standard sometimes used in German publishing, which measures type sizes in multiples of 0.25 mm, and proponents of the metrication of typography generally recommend the use of the millimetre for typographical measurements, rather than the development of new specifically typographical metric units. The Japanese already do this for their own characters (using the kyu, which is q in romanized Japanese and is also 0.25 mm), and have metric-sized type for European languages as well. One advantage of the q is that it reintroduces the proportional integer division of 3 mm (12 q) by 6 & 4.

During the age of the French Revolution or Napoleonic Empire, the French established a typographic unit of 0.4 mm, but except for the government's print shops, this did not catch on.

In 1973, the didot was restandardized in the EU as 0.375 (= ⁄8) mm. Care must be taken because the name of the unit is often left unmodified. The Germans, however, use the terms Fournier-Punkt and Didot-Punkt for the earlier ones, and Typografischer Punkt for this metric one. The TeX typesetting system uses the abbreviation dd for the earlier definition, and nd for the metric new didot

Notes

  1. Actually, Sebastien Truchet (1657–1729) had invented a similar type sizing system before Fournier implemented his point system. Truchet's system was applied to the types of the Imprimerie Royale, the romains du roi. It is thought that Fournier knew about Truchet's scheme that was based on the standard French Royal inch and a very fine unit of ⁄204 ligne. For further information on Truchet's system, refer to James Mosley's "The New Type Bodies of the Imprimerie Royale", pp. 400–408, Vol. 3, The Manuel Typographique of Pierre-Simon Fournier le jeune, Darmstadt 1995. and Jacques André's "Truchet & Types" .
  2. Regarding the background of the adoption of the Johnson Pica, Mr. Richard L. Hopkins, author of Origin of The American Point System says: "The major issue then was the expense involved in re-tooling literally hundreds of molds in each foundry to make them all conform to the new system. If they could avoid just a few sizes being altered, it would save hundreds of thousands of dollars. That is why the MS&J (Johnson) pica was adopted."

Select bibliography

  • Boag, Andrew. "Typographic measurement: a chronology", Typography papers, no. 1, 1996, The Department of Typography and Graphic Communication, The University of Reading, Reading 1996.
  • Bruce's Son & Company, Specimen of Printing Types, incl. Theo. L. DeVinne's "The Invention of Printing", New York 1878.
  • Carter, Harry. Fournier on Typefounding, The Soncino Press, London 1930.
  • Fournier, Pierre Simon, The Manuel Typographique of Pierre-Simon Fournier le jeune, Vols. I–III, Ed. by James Mosley, Darmstadt 1995.
  • Fournier, Pierre Simon. Modèles des Caractères de l'Imprimerie, including James Mosley's introduction, Eugrammia Press, London 1965.
  • Fournier, Pierre Simon. Manuel Typographique, Vols. I & II, Fournier & Barbou, Paris 1764–1766.
  • Hansard, T. C. Typographia, Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy, London 1825.
  • Hopkins, Richard L. Origin of The American Point System, Hill & Dale Private Press, Terra Alta 1976.
  • Hutt, Allen. Fournier, the complete typographer, Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa, NJ 1972.
  • Johnson, John. Typographia, Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, Brown & Green, London 1824.
  • Jones, Thomas Roy, Printing in America, The Newcomen Society of England, American Branch, New York 1948.
  • MacKellar Smiths & Jordan. One Hundred Years, Philadelphia 1896.
  • Mosley, James. "French Academicians and Modern Typography: Designing New Types in the 1690s", Typography papers, no. 2, 1997, The Department of Typography and Graphic Communication, The University of Reading, Reading 1997.
  • Moxon, Joseph. Mechanick Exercises On The Whole Art Of Printing, Oxford University Press, London 1958.
  • Ovink, G. Willem. "From Fournier to metric, and from lead to film", Quaerendo, Volume IX 2 & 4, Theatrum Orbis Terrarum Ltd., Amsterdam 1979.
  • Smith, John. The Printer's Grammar, L. Wayland, London 1787.
  • Yamamoto, Taro. pt – Type Sizing Units Converter, http://www.kt.rim.or.jp/~tyamamot/pt.htm Tokyo 2001.

References

  1. Radics, Vilmos; Ritter, Aladár (1984). Make-up and typography. International Organization of Journalists. p. 13. ISBN 9789630231367. Retrieved 25 November 2016. The typometer is an instrument for measuring typographical denominations: type sizes, column width and depth, slugs, type area, etc.
  2. ^ Wikibooks:LaTeX/Lengths

External links

Typography
Page
Paragraph
Character
Typeface anatomy
Capitalization
Visual distinction
Horizontal aspects
Vertical aspects
Typeface
classifications
Roman type
Blackletter type
Gaelic type
Specialist
Punctuation (List)
Typesetting
Typographic units
Digital typography
Typography in other
writing systems
Related articles
Related template
Categories: