wrf@mab.ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin) (06/04/91)
The May 24-31 issue of The Economist has a 2 page article on the design of their new typeface -- Ecotype. It was done with PostScript. Two major requirements were these: 1. That it look good after being faxed, and 2. that its small caps font not be obtrusive since they use so many small caps. This sounds like an excellent type for general computer use. Too bad they mentioned nothing about general availability. -- Wm. Randolph Franklin Internet: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (or @cs.rpi.edu) Bitnet: Wrfrankl@Rpitsmts Telephone: (518) 276-6077; Telex: 6716050 RPI TROU; Fax: (518) 276-6261 Paper: ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180
robertk@rkrajewski.lotus.com (Robert Krajewski) (06/06/91)
Yes, the Economist had a face-lift two issues back, and it looks very good. They replaced the old text font, Goudy Old Style, with their own Postscript design, Ecotype. It reminds me a little of Stone with more of an Old Style influence. They also ditched Helvetica and are now only using what looks like Johnson for sans-serif headings and such. The table of contents/masthead page has been cleaned up as well. I think the redesign is successful; the essential visual character of the magazine is the same, but more elegant and unified.
jlister@slhisc.uucp (John Lister) (06/07/91)
In article <4lsh!qd@rpi.edu> wrf@mab.ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin) writes: > >The May 24-31 issue of The Economist has a 2 page article on the design >of their new typeface -- Ecotype. It was done with PostScript. Two >major requirements were these: > [...] A most frustrating article--it only told half the story! What I wanted to know was why do they *fax* the printed output? If they now use PostScript, why not send that, then print it locally (either on an imagesetter if it's the final output, or on a laser if they're going to edit it further (or even the source from whatever page makeup they use...)). Irrelevant aside: I also am curious about how the various editions of the Economist differ. From casual comparison of a copy on a newsstand in London airport with my (US printed) subscription copy, there appear to be the same articles in a different order, with different advertising, but do I really see the same Economist as the man on the Clapham omnibus? John Lister. jlister@isc.shearson.com
uad1077@dircon.co.uk (Ian Kemmish) (06/09/91)
jlister@slhisc.uucp (John Lister) writes: >In article <4lsh!qd@rpi.edu> wrf@mab.ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin) writes: >> >>The May 24-31 issue of The Economist has a 2 page article on the design >>of their new typeface -- Ecotype. It was done with PostScript. Two >>major requirements were these: >> >[...] >A most frustrating article--it only told half the story! What I wanted to >know was why do they *fax* the printed output? If they now use PostScript, >why not send that, then print it locally (either on an imagesetter if it's >the final output, or on a laser if they're going to edit it further (or even >the source from whatever page makeup they use...)). >John Lister. >jlister@isc.shearson.com I expect they are used to people faxing individual articles to each other. You know and I know that telling someone to buy a copy is cheaper than faxing an article, but this is a *business*person's journal:-). Apart from anything else, even if they were faxing copy internally, they *surely* wouldn't be doing it with finished proffs would they? -- Ian D. Kemmish Tel. +44 767 601 361 18 Durham Close uad1077@dircon.UUCP Biggleswade ukc!dircon!uad1077 Beds SG18 8HZ United Kingdom uad1077@dircon.co.uk
john@gna.axis-design.fr (John Hughes) (06/10/91)
In article <1991Jun09.151311.5596@dircon.co.uk> uad1077@dircon.co.uk (Ian Kemmish) writes:
I expect they are used to people faxing individual articles to each
other. You know and I know that telling someone to buy a copy
is cheaper than faxing an article, but this is a *business*person's
journal:-). Apart from anything else, even if they were faxing
copy internally, they *surely* wouldn't be doing it with finished
proffs would they?
I think you assume they mean group 3 fax when they say "fax". I'm pretty
sure this is not the case. There are special "fax" systems sold for
newspapers that have >1000dpi resolution & use very fancy compression
algorithms and high speed digital lines. These are used to make the
"negatives" (sorry, don't know correct term) at the remote printing sites
and no typesetting is done outside the main site.
Why do they do this? Well, in the case I know about (the International
Herald Tribune) it's because they put all this stuff in long before
PostScript was invented and they can' afford to replace it yet.
Johnlee@sq.sq.com (Liam R. E. Quin) (06/11/91)
uad1077@dircon.co.uk (Ian Kemmish) writes: > jlister@slhisc.uucp (John Lister) writes: >> wrf@mab.ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin) writes: >>> The May 24-31 issue of The Economist has a 2 page article on the design >>> of their new [PostScript] typeface -- Ecotype. [...] >> A most frustrating article--it only told half the story! What I wanted to >> know was why do they *fax* the printed output? [...] > I expect they are used to people faxing individual articles to each > other. No. Newspapers have their own specialised fax machines, which are considerably bulkier than their office-dwelling counterparts. The newspaper fax machines have a high resolution, and it is common practice for a newspaper to fax the day's issue to an office in another country for local printing. This is how I read the Financial Times in Toronto, or the Guardian in southern Spain, or any of a number of other papers. And, quite frankly, if there's a loss of quality it's not large. So switching to sending PostScript would involve a change in technology at both the transmitting office and at the receiving site, The retention of the fax necessitates no change of the recipient's equipment. Liam -- Liam Quin, lee@sq.com, SoftQuad, Toronto, +1 416 963 8337 the barefoot programmer
tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff) (06/11/91)
In article <1991Jun7.152116.15777@slhisc.uucp> jlister@slhisc.uucp (John Lister) writes: >In article <4lsh!qd@rpi.edu> wrf@mab.ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin) writes: >>The May 24-31 issue of The Economist has a 2 page article on the design >>of their new typeface -- Ecotype. It was done with PostScript. Two >>major requirements were these: > >A most frustrating article--it only told half the story! What I wanted to >know was why do they *fax* the printed output? If they now use PostScript, >why not send that, then print it locally (either on an imagesetter if it's >the final output, or on a laser if they're going to edit it further (or even >the source from whatever page makeup they use...)). The article didn't say they "fax" the pages, in the American sense of the word. It said the pages are transmitted "in facsimile," which is Brit-speak for some sort of actual image rather than the abstract text. That probably does mean they transmit mean dots, not a high level PDL. It is, after all, in their interest to be able to control, dot-for-dot, what appears on the page worldwide. If they choose to transfer raster for this purpose, so what! It certainly lets them do things like experiment with different versions of Ecotype without having to ship software upgrades all over the place. One also assumes that the raster they send has a resolution matching that of the imagesetter it's destined for. So, the typographic considerations of bitmapped font readability at small point sizes which gave rise to the Ecotype design (Stone Informal, too) would come into play either way.
wrf@mab.ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin) (06/19/91)
In article <1991Jun7.152116.15777@slhisc.uucp> on 7 Jun 91 15:21:16 GMT jlister@slhisc.uucp (John Lister) writes: >Irrelevant aside: I also am curious about how the various editions of the >Economist differ. From casual comparison of a copy on a newsstand in London >airport with my (US printed) subscription copy, there appear to be the same >articles in a different order, with different advertising.... Dunno about the Economist. However Newsweek's International edition has many different articles, and a different cover, and well as some identical articles. I remember this well since I saw a Newsweek in Europe with a story on Seymour Cray but didn't buy it since I subscribe to Newsweek in the US. Unfortunately, my copy did not have that story. Reader's Digest also replaces some stories for their Canadian edition, as well as renaming "Life in these United States" to "Life's Like That". They didn't get that big by being insensitive. -- Wm. Randolph Franklin Internet: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (or @cs.rpi.edu) Bitnet: Wrfrankl@Rpitsmts Telephone: (518) 276-6077; Telex: 6716050 RPI TROU; Fax: (518) 276-6261 Paper: ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180