The standards Tschichold sets within these restrictions, are very restrictive. His obvious distain for books larger than A4 is rather surprising, as so many designers and publications do not follow these rules.
His suggestion of using the Golden Section as good template for book sizes is interesting, however, within these there are square shapes which he claims "will drop at the face", making them unsuitable.
I agree with parts of this theory, especially the practical side when it comes to storing a book larger an A4, which can be difficult. On the other hand, it mostly depends on the purpose of the book. If it is designed to be large and visually more heavy on the eye, then it possibly has a good reason that supports the design decision.
Typesetting:
Tschichold's style of structuring body text is very dense. It leaves little room for the eye to wonder, which is most likely the purpose of the design. However, that can be a negative factor as is disengages the reader. Separating paragraphs and creating more space for the text is a lot more approachable and kinder to the eye.
Opening pages:
This theory seems to apply to when more body text is present within the content. When applying this theory to my own design, I cannot imagine using a large amount of text to the point it needs putting into chapters or sections. With the majority of the content coming from photographs I feel sectioning off parts will only disconnect the reader from the flow of the book.
Lack of form:
Here, I agree fully that titles should differ from body text. Whether it being the size or the font type.
White paper:
This is something that I have never really considered before.
No comments:
Post a Comment