Formatting--a slightly alternative view

Reductus ad absurdum!

Courier Dark is my favorite font for printing anything.

I dislike Times New Roman because it is hard to read. I look at a ::lot:: of text, for very long periods of time, and TNR becomes blinding, unless its at about 14.5. I firmly support your right to disagree with me, but if you ask me to read a print off for you, please send it courier.

Now that Microsoft has made Calibri its default font in Word 2007, I wonder if we'll see advocates for it, too. I kind of like it.

Really, though, fonts are SUCH a minor thing. Courier is popular because it allows you to (accurately) estimate the amount of space a document will take up in honest-to-god bound pages. Word counting tools in word processors lie; their count is exact, but does not take into account empty space.

I am on the fence. I don't like TNR, and I don't like courier, I write in Bookman Old Style, but when I finished my novel and converted it to courier, it seemed huge and bloated to me. I think I may submit in Dark Courier 10.
P

I write the novel in whatever damn font I please.

But submissions? Follow the guidelines. You don't want to do anything to piss off the people who have the power to knock you back.

Switching TNR to 14-point, but leaving the margins at 1" does the same thing -- gets the page word count to about 250, lets you use TNR, and it's even more readable, b/c it's larger.

I find TNR 12-point too small for easy reading, personally, but that's partly b/c I write legal documents that are single-spaced, and then the TNR 12 point is too dense (along with the denseness of the actual meaning of the words).

JD

David I said:

At the risk of getting clobbered (or utterly dogpiled), I’d like to say a few words about how I format my manuscripts. Gillhoughly’s brazen endorsement of Times New Roman on another thread (already I hear cries of, “Die, heretic!” echoing throughout the board) has emboldened me, since I hear his sentiments from more and more publishing professionals.

I describe the reasoning and details at some length over on my blog (as well as discussing a few other issues), but in essence I found that, apart from basic preferences, there are two main issues:

1) Courier is less dense because it is nonproportional. All things held equal, this means the pages literally turn faster with Courier because there are less words per page..

2) Most studies find that, all things held equal, the eye tends to read proportional fonts such as Times New Roman more readily, because the proportional font groups the letters into words which are apprehended as single units. (This is probably why books are generally published in proportional fonts and not something like Courier!)

Now, I arrived at my approach intuitively. Courier always looked unprofessional to me, reading like the output of a typewriter (which some editors still prefer, of course). But Times New Roman sometimes seemed unbearably dense to me—how many effing words are we going to cram onto this page?.

So, I wrote my manuscripts in Times New Roman, but I widened the margins. Where others used 1 inch all round, I became more generous, and eventually settled on 1.5 inches Left, Top, and Bottom (LTB), and 1 inch on the Right (where the ragged edge gives the illusion of a wider margin).

As it turns out, 1.5” LTB and 1” R in Times New Roman averages out to about the same number of words per page as Courier in “standard format” of 1” all around. (For example, when I switch the formats for a whole novel of mine, I get 503 pages in the Times New Roman version and 508 pages in the Courier version. Close enough for me to say they are the same.) In other words, Courier with 1” margins and Times New Roman with 1.5” margins LTB and 1” R have roughly the same word count per page.

People reading manuscripts love for the pages to fly by (I’ve read enough to know). Courier makes the pages turn faster in "standard format" because of lower word density. Times New Roman makes the words themselves read faster. Combine Courier word count per page (by using wider margins) with Times New Roman speed, and I think the ‘readability’ of a manuscript jumps up significantly.

Note that I am not advocating that you violate the stated guidelines of any agent or publisher. Do what they say. But in the cases where they specify (rare), I’ve found that most of them suggest Courier OR Times New Roman, and a MINIMUM margin of 1” all around. What I’m suggesting complies with those guidelines. And I've never heard an editor ofr agent weep about wider-than-average margins.

I believe that in the longer term Courier is for copyeditors and screenwriters, and neither of those groups are probably dominant among folks who will be agreeing to represent or buy your work. Most of the editors and agents I meet nowadays like Times New Roman. Most of them are young (a hell of a lot younger than me, anyway). Most of the Courier fans I meet are, well, how do I put it…um, older?

Try this formatting scheme on for size. It’s been working very well for me (though I flatter myself that this might have something to do with my prose as well as my formatting). Maybe it just fits my phrasing and pacing. Or maybe there is something good about the word count per page of Courier and the readability of Times New Roman and wider margins.

[NOTE: Do not use this approach if your goal is to stuff as many words as possible onto a page. But I’m not sure that’s a great goal in any case. The sensation that "This page has gone on forever..." is not a big turn-on for readers.]

Click to expand...

I think where many go wrong is in thinking of the font as something to read, when it's really a matter of something to edit. When dealing with on screen text, I much prefer Times, though even here there are fonts better than either Times or Courier, and many editors prefer one of several fonts for on screen reading and editing. Times and Courier both fall short in this area.

Times, in fact, is badly outdated as an on screen font. It's no longer the clearest, and certainly no longer the easiest to read.

But diting on hardcopy is when Courier is so valuable. Times is a real pain in the ass, no matter what margins you use. The letters are tiny and cramped, and it's very difficult to insert proofreaders' marks with any degree of accuracy. There are simply too many letters per inch, too many words per line.

Courier is a big, open font that makes inserting proofreaders' marks an easy, accurate matter.

1.5 inch margins does reduce the number of words per page with Times, but it doesn't do a damned thing to make inserting proofreaders' marks one bit easier. Nor does it do anything to help eyestrain when you have to read seventy-five manuscripts in a day.

And I can still glance at a manuscript typed in Courier 12 and know almost exactly how much paper that story is going to use when it goes to print, whether it's a short story or a novel. It's much more difficult to do this with Times.

I really wish writers would stop worrying about how a manuscript looks and reads, and start worrying about how it edits. This is what concerns most editors.

And I really wish Times would die a peaceful death. For those who simply insist that how something reads is more important than how it edits, there are now much better fonts than Times, ones that read better, and edit better.

I didn't even read the OP's post because it was in Times.

To reiterate the obvious (or what should be): It doesn't matter how it looks to you. You're producing the manuscript for an agent/editor's eyes. Give them what they want. There are reasons most still prefer Courier 12, double-spaced.

caw

I submitted to both agent and editor in TNR 12-point, and both of them were perfectly happy with it. I would say that if a specific agent or editor gives you their individual preference, use that, but in the absence of such instructions, go with what works for you.

blacbird said:

To reiterate the obvious (or what should be): It doesn't matter how it looks to you. You're producing the manuscript for an agent/editor's eyes. Give them what they want. There are reasons most still prefer Courier 12, double-spaced.

caw

Click to expand...

I second this statement. I still don't understand why this concept is so hard for a lot of people to grasp. Everyone is perfectly free to prefer whichever font they like the best. But, as I am trying to remind myself these days, it's not all about what _I_ want. It's about what's easiest/most convenient for the person to whom I am submitting my manuscript. Period.

I agree with ClaudiaGray.
My agent and editor were fine with my font (12 pt TNR) at some point it was changed to Garamond and that also worked well.
James has hit the nail on the head - Use whatever font you want but the editor will use what is easiest for them to edit...
Computers are marvelous devices -- as fonts and margins can be effortlessly changed.

You should, of course, format a ms. any way you please for your own purposes, but I assure you, editors will look with disfavor at a ms. that is not formatted the way a publisher's submission statement requires.

There's a useful FAQ here.

A small addendum, useful to a few.

Be aware that young eyes which find a certain font and size easy reading are not the same experienced eyes with which a potential agent, editor, etc. will be seeing it. Fine vision requires more light by the reader's late 30s, and by the mid 40s many people can no longer read fine print with ease.

Maryn, beginning to have trouble with TNR 12, but good with 13

DavidI, basically you've created a nonissue from (at best) misreading what others've said. The police don't come around & check your default fonts. (But they do park behind your house & listen to your mind-waves with their radar guns.) You can write in Wanted Poster 7 in two columns on sideways 3-by-17 green paper, if that's what works for you. When you send it to someone else, either do what they ask or choose some bland boiring "standard" format. Personally, I've actively avoided monospace fonts ever since I got my first WP -- call it typist's backlash -- but if someone wants it in Courier or Verdana or Chancery or whatever, I'm totally there.