Type on Maps: All the Little Things that Actually Matter

Elaine Guidero
Penn State University
#nacis2015

Transcript

1. Six All the little things that actually matter Type on maps Elaine Guidero NACIS 2015 Minneapolis, MN
2. Six So...we’re mapping Prince
3. Six
4. Six
5. Six
6. Six
7. Six Typeface tones—different semantic effects The lazy dog and quick fox both took a nap. The lazy dog and quick fox both took a nap. The lazy dog and quick fox both took a nap. The lazy dog and quick fox both took a nap. The lazy dog and quick fox both took a nap.
8. Six A font anatomy lesson
9. Six Microaesthetics Univers Baskerville Adobe Jenson Pro
10. Six Microaesthetics terminal Univers Baskerville Adobe Jenson Pro
11. Six Microaesthetics Univers Baskerville Adobe Jenson Pro spur
12. Six Microaesthetics Univers Baskerville Adobe Jenson Pro
13. Six Microaesthetics serif Univers Baskerville Adobe Jenson Pro
14. Six Microaesthetics stroke contrast Univers Baskerville Adobe Jenson Pro
15. Six Microaesthetics Univers Baskerville Adobe Jenson Pro
16. Six Microaesthetics ear Univers Baskerville Adobe Jenson Pro
17. Six Microaesthetics story 1 2 2 Univers Baskerville Adobe Jenson Pro
18. Six Looking for microaesthetics Uppercase letters: Q, &, J, G, W, A, K, C, R, M, E, P, S, T, F, B, N, O, U, X, Y, D, H, Z, L, V, I. Lowercase letters: g, a, j, y, k, t, f, r, q, w, e, b, s, c, d, p, m, u, x, o, v, h, n, i, l, z. Mackiewicz (2005) Perfect & Rookledge (1983)
19. Six Cartographic research on type aesthetics is inaccurate
20. Six Why? Label properties ≠ typeface attributes Labels: describe features have properties external to the typeface Typefaces: have a coherent design have inherent properties that drive perception of personality
21. Six Label properties (macroaesthetics) 1. spline or tilt 2. kerning/tracking 3. point size (not x-height) Deeb et al. 2012 Caroga Lake Caroga Lake I t h a c a Ithaca Paisley Park Paisley Park
22. Six Typeface attributes (microaesthetics) 1. serif style 2. terminal style 3. x-height Caroga Lake Ithaca Ithaca Paisley Park Paisley Park Childers & Jass 2002; Koch 2012 Caroga Lake
23. Six So how do you choose a typeface? Use microaesthetics, not macroaesthetics, to identify semantic effect & determine tone Inductive research to establish guidelines
24. Six User study 1. Expert cartographers (you) chose typefaces 2. Expert users (typographers) evaluate designs on their semantic effect 3. Context of national mapping
25. Six 8 semantic effects bland modern cheap neutral corporate serious friendly whimsical
26. Six 36 typefaces—name them all
27. Six Arial Linotype Avenir FF Bau Cabin Camphor Std Adobe Caslon Pro Century Schoolbook Chaparral Pro Cisalpin PF DIN Farnham Text Futura BT Georgia Gill Sans Glypha Std Helvetica Neue ITC Johnston Karmina Sans Basic Klinic Slab FF Meta FF Meta Serif Museo Sans Condensed Myriad Pro Condensed News Gothic MT 36 typefaces Optima LT Std PT Sans Roboto Sans Condensed Sabon LT Std Scala Souvenir BT Tablet Gothic SemiCondensed Titillium Trebuchet Univers Utopia Std Verdana
28. Six Preliminary results (n=5) most bland most cheap most corporate most friendly most modern most neutral most serious most whimsical Meta Serif Chaparral Pro Futura Arial Sabon LT Std Trebuchet Titillium Tablet Gothic SemiCondensed
29. Six Preliminary results (n=5) Sabon LT Std Sabon LT Std Sabon LT Std Souvenir BT Glypha Std least bland least cheap least corporate least friendly least modern least neutral least serious least whimsical
30. Six Identify letters and earmarks Jaegk Qufyc Jaegk Qufyc
31. Six Bland Jaegk Qufyc most: Meta Serif least: Chaparral Pro Sabon LT Std Futura Jaegk Qufyc Jaegk Qufyc Jaegk Qufyc
32. Six Jaegk Qufyc Jaegk Qufyc Friendly most: Chaparral Pro least: Glypha
33. Six Final thought Letterform elements, not label properties, contribute to typeface tone
34. Six xkcd.com
35. Six References & resources Childers, T. L., and J. Jass. 2002. All dressed up with something to say: effects of typeface semantic associations on brand perceptions and consumer memory. Journal of Consumer Psychology 12 (2): 93–106. Deeb, R., K. Ooms, and P. De Maeyer. 2012. Typography in the Eyes of Bertin, Gender and Expertise Variation. The Cartographic Journal 49 (2): 176–185. Koch, B. E. 2012. Emotion in typographic design: an empirical examination. Visible Language 46 (3): 206–227. Mackiewicz, J. O. 2005. How to use five letterforms to gauge a typeface’s personality: a resarch-driven method. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 35 (3): 291–315. Perfect, C., and G. Rookledge. 1983. Rookledge’s International Type-Finder. London, UK: Sarema Press. Raisz, E. 1962. Principles of Cartography. New York: McGraw-Hill. http://thetypestudio.com/type-talk/the-anatomy-of-a-character/
36. Six Palette Texta Regular Texta Light R255 G255 B255 R245 G144 B152 R238 G36 B60 R90 G0 B231 R102 G97 B97 R12 G10 B10