Typophile

Our choices of text editors

stormbind

Hi,

Since applying typography to my work, it has occurred to me that Microsoft Word isn't very efficient. For example, I am using Myriad Pro and I find myself manually adjusting letter spacing and letter kerning all of the time.

Being that I am relatively inexperienced in matters of typography, it seemed reasonable to assume that proper typographers would know of more efficient work flows. Could you please share your thoughts on text editors?

I cannot justify the cost of InDesign. However, I welcome your thoughts on all software as it could save me many hours trying free approaches such as Serif PagePlus.

Thanks for your input, it is appreciated and I apologise for being a novice :)

Text editors or Word processors? Certainly no text editor is going to be an alternate to InDesign.

In regards to inexpensive word processors that have some nice OT features, Pages is my recommendation.

If you need a simple word processing app that is more type-sensitive, Pagehand looks interesting. Although I haven't used it.

I gather that stormbind uses some version of Windows, so Pages and Pagehand are out of question…

:)

Yes, I am using Windows XP for the mean time though I am a fan of MacOS. Incidentally, you can install cracked versions of MacOS on a standard PC :)

I have just given Serif PagePlus a chance and sadly, it cannot import Microsoft Word projects. Furthermore, Microsoft Publisher crashes when trying to render my Microsoft Word project with all the small kernings. Is all my hard work trapped inside this horrendous application?

I don’t think Word was ever intended for kerning…
But you can reset the kerning and see if the new app gives you a better appearance.
Also keep in mind that the only way to really see kerning issues is printing.

Glen, when you say you're applying typography to your work, do you mean you're being paid to design with type? If you are, you're going to have to bite the bullet and get InDesign sooner or later anyway.

If you're self-employed, you may be able to get a tax deduction. (You can in the US, I don't know what the rules are in the UK.)

If, on the other hand, your principal occupation is something else, and you're simply frustrated that MS Word has a thousand features you don't want and none of the features you do want--well, join the club.

You can still differentiate your work from the careless stuff you see everywhere. Use styles rather than manual formatting, and override the default "based on Normal." Specify line spacing in points instead of "single," and always use "space above/below" in the Paragraph menu to create space around headings, lists, etc. You'd be surprised how professional you can make MS Word look.

Define a style or styles with the spacing and kerning the way you want. You're not limited to Word's built-in styles. You can even define character styles that won't affect the entire paragraph. Or just change the Normal style and everything based on it will automatically change, too. Then allow Word to save the changes in your normal.dot file if it asks.

Later edit: You don't have to create completely new styles -- you can modify Word's built-in styles any way you want to, except they can't be renamed.

Hi PublishingMojo :)

I found your question very difficult to answer! In a nutshell, I am intentionally exposing myself to the fullness of typography so that I can claim to know it. I do not yet make that claim :)

Thanks to everyone for their tips. I found Microsoft can randomly change a character's rendered size for inexplicable reasons. I am not referring to the specified font size, which remains constant.

>I found Microsoft can randomly change a character’s rendered size for inexplicable reasons. I am not referring to the specified font size, which remains constant.

Rendered on screen, or when printed? (Although I haven't really seen either in Word.) Is the whole character scaled up or down in size, or is this perhaps the clipping that happens when the line spacing is less than the font point size?

Captured from web.archive.org on 3 Feb 2010. view this capture