Missing font that is requested in guidelines

Really picky s h i t from the pub. There's a lot of other pubs out there

My understanding is that "serif" is a type of typeface. "Serif" means "flag." A serif font has the little flags off the tops and bottoms of the letters, like Times or Bookman. A non-serif font, also called a sans-serif font is one without the little flags, like ariel or this one in this message (at least on my screen, this board has all non-serif fonts.) Typically, like in a newspaper, the text is a serif font and the headlines are sans-serif.

I'm open to corrections if I'm wrong or a bit off, but that's my understanding.

Courier and Times Roman are both serif typefaces, as opposed to Lucida and Arial which aren't.

Typefaces are broken into two major families: Serif and sans-serif. Each of those are broken into two families: monospace and proportional.

When in doubt, your submissions should be in a serif monospace font.

These are "serif" fonts:

Bool Antiqua
Garamond
Georgia
Palatino
Times New Roman
Courier (which is also a fixed font)


Serif fonts are easier to read on paper.




These are "san serif" fonts:

Arial
Century
Comics
Franklin
Impact
Tahoma
Trebuchet
Verdana
Lucida Console (which is also a fixed font)

These fonts are great for on-screen texts (such as web pages) and headlines.

Fixed fonts are great for ms because they're easy to read and edit.

Good luck with the submission, Julie.

Go to google and look up 1001 fonts, they are all free and you can download all that you want. Save them into an empty folder on your c: Drive and open your Windows or OS Fonts folder, go to file/add new fonts/ then throw it down. You can find a ton that you may help snaze up your MS.

Jonny, a C drive and Windows are PC things. A Mac doesn't have those. Julie said she has a Mac. But I think the problem was solved a few posts up. A Mac does have some serif fonts.

Font

Jonny Ryan Mac said:

Go to google and look up 1001 fonts, they are all free and you can download all that you want. Save them into an empty folder on your c: Drive and open your Windows or OS Fonts folder, go to file/add new fonts/ then throw it down. You can find a ton that you may help snaze up your MS.

Click to expand...

From an editor's point of view, snazing up a manuscript is a naughty thing. Just Courier 12 (Or Courier 10BT, if Macs still use it) will do fine. Get fancy, get rejected.

Jamesaritchie said:

From an editor's point of view, snazing up a manuscript is a naughty thing. Just Courier 12 (Or Courier 10BT, if Macs still use it) will do fine. Get fancy, get rejected.

Click to expand...

One note, though: Book-length manuscripts should (except when specifically stated otherwise) be done in a proportional serif typeface, such as Bookman, Book Antiqua, Century Old Style, or (if you're on a bare-bones Linux system) Times New Roman (sometimes inaccurately called "Times Roman" or "Times"). Particularly in the world of serious nonfiction, Courier in book-length manuscripts is developing an underground reputation as the mark of an inexperienced writer, and if your work has nonlinear elements (e.g. figures, tables, footnotes, etc.) you had better not use a monospaced font like Courier. Although this is not quite the same thing as the mark of a bad writer, it can't help.

For less-than-book-length works, some Luddite markets that honestly believe that a monospaced font gives editors a better eyeball chance at figuring out how many column-inches an item will fill continue to demand Courier. Unfortunately, that probably means bowing to the Luddites for articles and short fiction and anthology contributions.

Jaws said:

One note, though: Book-length manuscripts should (except when specifically stated otherwise) be done in a proportional serif typeface, such as Bookman, Book Antiqua, Century Old Style, or (if you're on a bare-bones Linux system) Times New Roman (sometimes inaccurately called "Times Roman" or "Times"). Particularly in the world of serious nonfiction, Courier in book-length manuscripts is developing an underground reputation as the mark of an inexperienced writer, and if your work has nonlinear elements (e.g. figures, tables, footnotes, etc.) you had better not use a monospaced font like Courier. Although this is not quite the same thing as the mark of a bad writer, it can't help.

For less-than-book-length works, some Luddite markets that honestly believe that a monospaced font gives editors a better eyeball chance at figuring out how many column-inches an item will fill continue to demand Courier. Unfortunately, that probably means bowing to the Luddites for articles and short fiction and anthology contributions.

Click to expand...

Not hardly. No way, no how. Experienced writers use Courier 12 in book length mansucripts, and I don;t know a single editor anywhere in this country who doesn't prefer Courier 12. I know quite a few who actively hate Bookman, ands loath Book Antiqua to the point where they won't even read it.

I don't know where this information comes from, but it's absolutely, completely, utterlty wrong. And it certainly doesn't come from any of teh pro level websites out there.

I know one book editor who has the assistant editor reject anything not in Times or Courier out of hand. Without even a read.

I know a top SF editor who will read Times, but he moans and groans and steam comes out of his ears when any manuscript isn't in Courier 12. You really don't want an editor reading your manuscript with this attitude. It can bias him against it.

Pro writer use Courier 12. Pro editors want Courier 12. Preo level websites all over the internet, from pro writers and pro editors, say use Courier 12.

The only reason some editors read other fonts is because writers don't listen. In fact, the only reason Times is accepted at most places is because writers don't listen. Most word processors are defaulted to times, so thousanda and thousands of writers just use it, and editors finally gave up the striggle.

None of the fonts you mention are anywhere near as easy to edit as Courier, or give you the same, proper, space count as Courier.

Most, not all, editors will certainly read Times, but I do knw a handful of top editors who will reject Times out of hand. Courier 12 is still the standard with every top editor I know, with both fiction and nonfiction.

As one editor recently put it, Courier is the ONLY font that will pleadse any editor. Courier is the ONLY font where you can't go wrong.

Those in that undrground better come up for air. It's complete nonsense. Inexperienced writers use Bookman, or Book Atiqua, or Ariel, or you name it. Pro writers use Courier 12, and pro editors want Courier 12. ESPECIALLY in book length manuscripts. Using other fonts is the mark of a complete amateur.

Fonts

I think what many overlook where fonts and computers are concerned is that computers haven't changed some things in any way. Seventy-five years ago, writers used a manual typewriter to put ink on paper. Today writers use a deskjet, an inkujet, or a laser printer to put ink on paper.

But whether you use a manual typewriter, or the latsest whiz-bang laser printer, the resulting product is still ink on paper.

Seventy-five years ago, editors edited ink on paper manuscripts by hand. Today, editors still edit ink on paper manuscripts by hand. It's the easiest, fastest, most efficient way of doing the job.

Seventy-five years ago or today, Courier 12 is still, far and away, the easiest font to edit. Bookman, Book Antiqua, Ariel, and three or four other fonts are prettier than Courier. No doubt about it. But no editor alive cares how a manuscript looks. You don't publish manuscripts, you publish books made from the manuscript.

As long as editors still edit by hand, Courier will remain the preferred font by most because it's the only font that has enough room in every direction to allow easy use of proofreaders' marks.

I know exactly one pro editor who prefers Times New Roman, but it's because she's in a situation when editing by hand isn't an option, even though she requires snail mail manuscripts.

Times New Roman and Book Antiqua both jam letters too close together for easy insertion of proofreaders' marks, and while Bookman is very pretty, it, too, is more difficult to edit by hand than Courier.

Type this in your word processor: Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered weak and weary over

If your margins are set correctly, one inch all around, this will run exactly margin to margin.

Type it five times. Make the first line Courier 12, make the second line Times New Roman, make the third line Bookman, make the fourth line Book Antiqua, and make the fifth line Ariel.

If you can't tell at a glance why editors prefer to edit Courier 12, you haven't edited enough manuscripts.

Jaws said:

One note, though: Book-length manuscripts should (except when specifically stated otherwise) be done in a proportional serif typeface, such as Bookman, Book Antiqua, Century Old Style, or (if you're on a bare-bones Linux system) Times New Roman (sometimes inaccurately called "Times Roman" or "Times"). Particularly in the world of serious nonfiction, Courier in book-length manuscripts is developing an underground reputation as the mark of an inexperienced writer, and if your work has nonlinear elements (e.g. figures, tables, footnotes, etc.) you had better not use a monospaced font like Courier. Although this is not quite the same thing as the mark of a bad writer, it can't help.

Click to expand...

I'll echo jamesritchie and say that this is just wrong - misleading and potentially damaging advice.

Interesting trivium #1: The first American writer to submit a typewritten manuscript was Mark Twain.

Interesting trivium #2: Some of Herman Melville's more interesting word choices in his printed works have as their origin the fact that Herman Melville's handwriting was very difficult to read.

I was wondering where Jaws got this info myself. Every publisher I've ever looked at wants Courier, but say they will accept Times. Because it looks like a typewriter, and it's easy to read.

I think it needs to be made clear that using Courier is a requirement of American publishers. It may not be so in other countries.

As an editor (in the UK) I personally prefer Times New Roman, or a similar serif font for editing on paper. If I'm editing on screen I prefer Arial, or a similar sans-serif font (and will usually change it in the files to Arial to make it easier for me). I do mostly edit non-fiction, but I have also edited fiction. I have never had to edit a manuscript submitted in Courier. I have had to edit a few submitted in Comic Sans and all I can say about that is ewwww, but it didn't prevent me from editing the manuscript.

Provided the manuscript is printed double-spaced and with decent margins, there is plenty of space for editing by hand - whatever font is used. I have occasionally had to edit manuscripts that were printed single-spaced. Now that is annoying.

So if you're submitting your manuscript to a US publisher, by all means follow the Courier (and other) rules (but check the specific publisher's guidelines first, in case they have different requirements). But if you're submitting to a UK publisher, I would say use Times New Roman or similar and make sure it's double-spaced and has at least 2cm margin on all sides (again check with the publisher for any specific requirements).

To be honest, I really don't understand this insistence on Courier. If all books were printed in a monospaced font, then sure, that would make sense. But they're not. A book printed in a monospaced font would look ghastly and be very difficult to read. The number of pages a monospaced manuscript takes up is really not going to give a clear indication of how many pages the finished book is going to take up. It depends on what font is used, what font size is used, what leading is used, how big the margins are, etc. If every book an imprint publishes uses the same font, font size, leading and margins, then it might make sense. But how many publishers do that? Maybe they do in the US and that's why it's so important to use Courier there. In fiction, the settings can be tweaked here and there to bring the book down in extent (or up, if you're Alex Garland *g*). The only way you're going to get a definitive idea of how long a book will be in print is to use the exact same settings (including line length, font, font size) as the finished book will use. And it's unfair to ask an author to do that, because the kind of fonts used in printed books are generally not the kind of fonts that come with your computer, or with any of your software packages.

I know the vast majority of people he are American and therefore stressing the need to use Courier is important. However, it would be nice to remember sometimes that there are people from all over the world on this board (and on pretty much all posting boards on the net, for that matter).

[Can you tell how much it bugs me when people forget that America is not the only country in the world?]

Quick request for clarification:

Paper is still okay for hard copies, right? There's no faction currently pushing for papyrus, or rolled lead sheets or something similar?

It seems that the Font Wars have started again.

Source for my comments: Having worked as an editor at a midmajor specialty publisher; constant contact with a huge range and variety of editors from small presses up to the Big Five, in a wide variety of publishing niches.

Note that I did not say that one font system is "mandatory" or "prohibited." I said preferred. I also said that there isn't a universal correct answer even as to preference. Across the range of serious trade nonfiction editors, my notes indicate that more than 80% of the editors out there prefer proportional typefaces in book manuscripts, and 95% do so when the manuscript includes significant nonlinear elements (such as notes and tables). It's closer to 70-30 in the rest of trade nonfiction, but closer to 90-10 in academic nonfiction. Given that nonfiction is the bulk of the publishing industry, and fiction imprints tend to pick up nonfiction practices about three or four years down the road, I think this matters—particularly as there has been a considerable change in preferences since 2000. I confirmed the trend last year talking to some fiction editors, about a third of whom had changed their "font worship" in the previous three or four years.

Note, too, that I specifically distinguished short-piece from book-length markets. For whatever reason, the short-piece markets still cling to monospaced fonts as a preference.

All of that said, take my comments as "dangerous" or whatever. They're based on my experience and my clients' experience; yours may vary. The mere fact that this raises such an emotional BS reaction should be the first indication to everyone that it's based on irrational preconceived notions and personal experience, especially since virtually every study ever done demonstrates that monospaced fonts are harder to read than either serif or sanserif proportionally spaced fonts.

I don't doubt anyone's experience, it was just my personal experience that I ran across the almost exclusive use of Courier in sub guidelines. US pubs, of course.

I write book length fiction.

Jaws -
You're aware that you're posting in the Writing Novels forum and not the "serious trade nonfiction" forum, right? Regardless as to the tendency of trade fiction publishers to follow the lead of non-fiction publishers (a point which you have not supported), the VAST majority of fiction publishers, in their submission guidelines, call for Courier or TNR at present. Failure to follow these guidelines is a fine reason to have a ms returned unread... If someone asks for something specific, I tend to give it to them.
That's why I (and others) referred to your advice as 'dangerous' -- you're talking about a different world of publishing altogether. I'm pleased that you're seeing this revolution in acceptable fonts (I hate Courier), but I'd rather have my ms read than make a stand.

Type this in your word processor:

Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered weak and weary over

If your margins are set correctly, one inch all around, this will run exactly margin to margin.

Click to expand...

I did this in MS Word. All margins are 1" and the typeface is Courier New 12 point. The line wrapped. It was the 'r' in over that pushed it to a second line.

??

From my days in book production: Courier used to let us determine the page count of the finished product not because of a particular number of words per manuscript page, but because of a technical procedure called a 'castoff'. A castoff could be done on any manuscript in a monospace font (eg, Courier), but not in any proportional font (eg, Times Roman).

You would count the number of pages in the manuscript. You would take perhaps ten or fifteen random pages, and count a random number of lines on those pages. The average of those would be the number of lines per page. Then, you would consult a type directory to find out the number of characters per pica in the final (typeset) font at the final (typeset) size. Then, based on the trim size and margins of the final book, you could determine how many characters (not words) would fit in a line of type. Etc, etc... it was a mathematical conversion.

Courier didn't have anything to do with readability, then. Manuscripts were typewritten when I started, and there weren't a lot of options for fonts. After things got more computerized, the publishers I worked with continued to request Courier. The whole point of using Courier was so that production would be able to do a castoff and figure out exactly how many pages the book would be -- which affected things like the binding options, the kind of cover choices, all kinds of things, not to mention basic profitability (cost of paper).

For what it's worth, as long as you had a type book and the manuscript was monospaced, you could figure out pretty much to the page how the book would print, although anything within 10% was considered acceptable.

Again, nonfiction environment.

Just wanted to mention that Courier used to be requested for reasons that had nothing to do with readability.