Dear type enthusiasts,
I'd like to ask for your help -- your combined expertise must be endless, no doubt. I've been struck by a version of Times (New Roman) I saw in a book, a while back. There's something ineffably good about it; very pleasing to the eye, and extremely easy to read without distraction.
My question is: does anyone know which version (or perhaps national variant) of TNR it is? An expert in a different thread said there were several country-specific of TNR, variously labeled TNR 627, 727, and 827. (E.g., the German one had slightly shorter capitals, to make them less obtrusive because of their prevalence in German writing.)
A friend suggested that it seems to be a TNR with higher ascenders. What do you folks think?
I've attached a sample page, for your edification. It's from a 1980 book published at Springer or Kluwer. I can't tell if it was lead type or set digitally.
Your help is much appreciated -- thank you!
Comments
This is an example of phototypesetting, and a rather good one at that. You can tell by the softness of the imaging, which was output onto photosensitive paper from a film matrix. I suspect it is the product of one of the Berthold machines, likely the ADS (Akzidenz Dialog System), which was introduced in the 1970s. Berthold’s photo fonts were exceptionally well rendered, not only in character design, but in their spacing, as well. Their systems were by no means the fastest, but they were the best quality and they were favored by most West German publishers. I agree with you: there is something ineffably good about this example.
The reigning expert in phototypesetting systems is Frank Romano, president of the Museum of Printing, in Haverhill, Massachusetts, and a professor emeritus at Rochester Institute of Technology. He’ll be happy to give you an opinion.
I had a hunch it may be Berthold type. I do have their version of Times. Hastily digitized, and with just basic kerning, nothing else. (The sample I posted had ligatures, at least.) I can see why Berthold went under; they must have been so focused on dominating the photo typesetting market that they missed the boat on the digital tsunami coming their way. Too bad.
Again, thank you! Much appreciated. I'll follow up on your advice.
Mr Hudson, thanks for your tip. I like your text font a lot. Looks like a love child of Berthold's Concorde and Times Classic Text, a 1970s' successor to TNR. Very nice.
If I remember correctly, the German version of Times New Roman had slightly lighter capitals, not slightly shorter ones.
Again, what a pity that most of those versions didn't make it to digital.
BTW, I hope one day you'll bring back your old lists, like the "Top rational serifs for text" one. I still remember it from back in the day, though I see it's gone from the internet now.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/stewf/25342752824/in/album-72157710561700526/
TNR 827 seems to me a needless sop to long-dead French fashion. Its lowercase 'g' is a tribute to a century of didones, not really to Romain du Roi. Ugly and uncalled for. Same goes for 'R' and 'Q.' Why?
In your second comment, you mentioned a document (mr_42_2.pdf); was there a link to it, or perhaps a URL address? Thanks in any case.
I think I like the original z better, though. One of the many, many things I like about TNR is, its italics slant at just the right angle, and work to emphasize without stridency. They draw your attention to what's emphasized, but not to themselves. The initial, unswashed z did that very well; the 1938 one, not so much, IMHO. It kinds of stands out from its lowercase siblings.
Also, the lowercase italic f is a bit too curly and curvy; I think Sabon does it better.