Lecture 5: Typeface and Documentation

1. Pick a typeface – Times New Roman (Times Roman) Produce a timeline of the typeface. From its inception to how it is used today. Show examples. Show off shoots. Show its ideals in use.
Brief timeline of the font:
1931 - Commissioned by The Times and created by Victor Lardent at Monotype 1932 - Debuted in The Times in 3 October
1933 - Released for commercial sale
1933-1972 - Used by The Times in its original form
1973-2004 - Variants of Times New Roman used in The Times
Since 1994, nearly all browsers have shipped with Times as the default font. It was replaced as the default font in Microsoft Office in 2007.


Times New Roman is also part of the Liberation Font.  A collective name of four TrueType font families: Liberation Sans, Liberation Sans Narrow, Liberation Serif and Liberation Mono. These fonts are metric-compatible with Monotype Corporation's Arial, Arial Narrow, Times New Roman, and Courier New (respectively), the most commonly used fonts on Microsoft's Windows operating system and Office suite. These fonts are permit free and open source software systems to have high-quality fonts that are metric-compatible with Microsoft software.
Times New Roman was such a popular font that it replaced 12 pt. Courier New as the default font used on all US diplomatic documents. This notable change took place in February of 2004, and now Times New Roman is a standard with even the US government.

Behind the Times?

Times New Roman – The Ideal Type
Times New Roman was designed for use in newspaper printing presses in 1932 and is not ideal for use in a modern printed book anymore. It was created to be used primarily in print and therefore looks typographically antiquated. Times New Roman is still frequent in book typography, particularly in mass-market paperbacks in the United States. Especially because of its adoption in Microsoft products, it has become one of the most widely used typefaces in history.

The name “Times New Roman” was used because the former font of The Times was called “Times Old Roman”. It was based on another typeface by Morison, called ‘Plantin’, but revisions were made to make it more economical in terms of space and to increase legibility. Times New Roman is still widely used in book typography, and because of its popularity, the typeface has been influential in the subsequent development of a number of serif typefaces both before and after the start of the digital-font era. One notable example is Georgia, which has very similar stroke shapes to Times New Roman but wider serifs.

Times New Roman lends itself for body text in any publication that needs to have a classic yet practical look. Combining excellent legibility with good economy, it is used a lot for books and newspapers. Times New Roman is not very suitable for on-screen usage although it is one the web-safe fonts judged to be available on every computer worldwide.

The ubiquitous nature of Times New Roman has made it an ideal choice for situations where fonts can’t be embedded. It’s also highly readable, even at smaller sizes. Times New Roman is best suited for body copy, both online and off.

Times change, but also stays the same

Times New Roman is still widely used today, though many have cited it being “stuffy and boring”, “belonging to an older age” due to its usage in print media and government agencies. Just like Helvetica, Times New Roman was created with the intent of legibility. In text blocks, it was concluded after much study that it was easier to read a font that had serifs in the upper and lower case. "Sans serif" fonts (fonts without serifs) such as Helvetica and Ariel are difficult to read in large text blocks so they would be automatically less ideal in long newspaper columns or book pages.



2. As a group, choose something to document. With the camera you have with you document it. Document it until Wednesday. Pay particular attention to your act of documentation (include you? Separate you? How does it affect your decision/s as you are aware of your act of documention?)

I have always been a very conscious person, and this series of documentation has made me more particular about the way I go about taking photos in the mirror. Although a few of my photos are taken with just my bare face on, my face is still covered because of the angle I took the photos from. Initially, I felt really strange on the idea of having to show strangers how I look like in the mirror for consecutive 5 days but as the days pass, I tried to stop being less self-conscious and took a few of the photos when I was just about to hit the sacks. I realized then, if I were to prepare for a shot every single time (make-up on and dressed up), it would not be as 'real' and 'raw' as I wanted it to be.

This series of documentation represents my early mornings. Before my morning coffee, i am unfriendly and highly irritable. These photos show that I am wearing sunglasses which serves two main purposes - hiding and not wanting to talk to anyone, and protection from the harsh morning sunlight. I feel involved when i take these photos because i am suddenly aware of how i look like to fellow morning commuters, and as the project progressed i felt the need to take 'better' pictures - even if it was early and i was feeling tired. This has been a very interesting documentation project, I plan to keep on documenting my mornings and maybe evenings as well to compare any inherent difference.

Ever since my school timetable in poly started to be more flexible than the 8am to 5pm of secondary and primary school days, I stopped being a morning person altogether. Documenting my appearance in the morning just added on to another reason why I find preparing for the day in the morning so troublesome. Yet, through this act of documentation, I realised that as much as I can be pretty nonchalant about my appearance, with the camera in the picture (no pun intended), I am just as self-conscious as anyone out there - it can be seen that my face is mostly covered in the pictures. I also stopped documenting on the 4th day because my house underwent renovations and I felt conscious about not only myself but my surroundings as well. This documentation process made me realise how much is put into consideration when people record something with the camera but also made me ponder - so how real is reality TV then?

The deliberate action of documenting my first look every morning has made me more conscious about myself, and even the environment. I had never noticed how dirty my mirror was until I had to photograph my mirror reflection and review the photo daily. When I had the patience, I would take a few shots and choose the most satisfactory one. I realised how I felt bothered that strangers would be able to see what I look like in a home-environment.

As a group, we decided to document our first looks into the mirror every day for 5 days. With the introduction of the medium (camera), I could no longer simply go through my mundane morning preparations without affected to a certain degree. As the series of shots progressed, I was more concerned about how I looked on camera, and began to unconsciously "pose" for the picture. this "inclusion" into the process made the morning ritual "special". It was also weird that this documentation also "excluded" me from the act with the introduction of the "other", even though the "other" was myself.

In conclusion, we all felt conscious and more aware of ourselves as the documentation progressed. We felt involved with the photo, mainly because we are in it, and therein a highlight in the way we want to portray ourselves in the photos taken. It was a pretty risky decision to document ourselves because it is an intimate act, even if we are alone with our phones or cameras, and the mirror.