Compressed vs. Condensed typefaces
Gilbert Li
As I understand it one is the result of digitally "squeezing" the ordinary
version while the other is originally drawn. Which is which? In particular
I'm thinking of Adobe's new packages for ITC Franklin Gothic Compressed
and Condensed.
Thanks,
Gil
Peter Debin
-------
Both condensed and compressed styles were made in the days of metal type and
before digitizing. Properly, they would each have to be redrawn rather than
manipulated to look right. If you compress the letter S in a font
manipulation program enough, the diagonal area in the center of the letter
will look fatter than the other letters around it.
ShermanRo
both might be "digitally squeezed," as you say or both might be designed
as "squeezed." there's often no way to know unless you research the
history of the font and talk to the manufacturer or designer. whether
compressed or condensed, either should rarely be used for conventional
applications (that is, anything that is not consider avant garde or
necessary for small spaces). if reading and comprehension is your goal,
play it safe and don't use them and don't take normal fonts and "squeeze"
them with horizontal scaling (QuarkXPress).
David Lemon
> Gilbert Li,g...@interlog.com writes:
> As I understand it one is the result of digitally "squeezing" the ordinary
> version while the other is originally drawn. Which is which? In particular
> I'm thinking of Adobe's new packages for ITC Franklin Gothic Compressed
> and Condensed.
I guess I missed the original post (and this response comes quite late),
but I can clear this up. Neither ITC Franklin Gothic Compressed nor the
Condensed are algorithmic distortions; both were drawn and digitized for
the widths they use, by David Berlow (now running the Font Bureau).
- David Lemon
type nerd
Zany eskimo craves fixed job with quilting party.