Justified, schmustified

majorbabs · **Posted:** Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Following the discussion on serif vs. non-serif fonts, can someone direct me to any research (even if it's their own TCE opinion) about justified vs. nonjustified columns in terms of readability?I want an excuse to keep my informal print publication (not a newspaper) in ragged right, but a non-trained colleague says that justified always "looks more professional." Support either way is welcome.Thanks.

KfitzR · **Posted:** Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:07 pm

In most instances, rag right is much easier to read. If justification produces odd spaces between words, it interferes with readability. If it doesn't it will be OK. In many programs, justification separates words so badly that you are close to reading word by word and not entire thoughts. See Spot Run. Funny Funny Spot. Drives me nuts.
Also cut the hyphenation.
Newspapers have very high-end programs to help them around the space problems.

Rio · **Posted:** Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:18 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by KfitzR:
In most instances, rag right is much easier to read. If justification produces odd spaces between words, it interferes with readability. If it doesn't it will be OK. In many programs, justification separates words so badly that you are close to reading word by word and not entire thoughts. See Spot Run. Funny Funny Spot. Drives me nuts.
Also cut the hyphenation.
Newspapers have very high-end programs to help them around the space problems.<hr></blockquote>If you're going to eliminate hyphenation, you should do so only if you eliminate justification at the same time. Otherwise, those word-separation problems you allude to will only be worse.Kfitz, I think you overstate the problem of bad line breaks in any case. If the layout program's hyphenation algorithm is worth anything and if copy editors are allowed to squeeze text slightly, bad word breaks shouldn't be an issue.Most newspapers I've worked at have used justification for standard news copy, and ragged right for opinion columns. A whole newspaper in ragged right would look very strange, and I doubt very much it would be more readable.

Gatekeeper · **Posted:** Mon Mar 01, 2004 2:08 pm

My paper is all justified, except for opinion pieces and listings.Gatekeeper-30-

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Mon Mar 01, 2004 2:29 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Gary Kirchherr:
If you're going to eliminate hyphenation, you should do so only if you eliminate justification at the same time. Otherwise, those word-separation problems you allude to will only be worse.<hr></blockquote>I agree.[snip] <blockquote>quote:<hr>If the layout program's hyphenation algorithm is worth anything and if copy editors are allowed to squeeze text slightly, bad word breaks shouldn't be an issue.<hr></blockquote>Unfortunately, some good papers have bad hyphenation algorithms. Ever see "coach" hyphenated? Fixing the problem can become a low priority amid other problems. And at some of these papers copy editors are not allowed to squeeze text. <blockquote>quote:<hr>Most newspapers I've worked at have used justification for standard news copy, and ragged right for opinion columns. A whole newspaper in ragged right would look very strange, and I doubt very much it would be more readable.<hr></blockquote>I like ragged right for columns running on news pages, and agree that an entire paper in rag right would be difficult to read. For some publications, though, depending on kerning, leading, typeface, column width and page size, rag right can work.[ March 01, 2004: Message edited by: Wayne Countryman ]

majorbabs · **Posted:** Mon Mar 01, 2004 3:55 pm

Thanks to all of you for your help.

paulwiggins · **Posted:** Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:21 pm

Our group style is to have most copy justified both sides on news and sport. The paper becomes more readable by bearing in mind two things: A) The seven column tabloid width measure is a measure for the ads. It's a mere starting point for layout. B) Putting at least one item on the page in ragged right, particularly on the items in a 14p6 measure is useful.Excessive leading , small type x-height, overly wide column widths, and insufficient or excessive paragraph interspacing often gives ragged right setting a bad name.A final word there is no typography equivalent of law 32 I find the The Newspaper Designer's Handbook useful but it does not have, and I trust would not claim to, have a monopoly on wisdom.[ March 02, 2004: Message edited by: Paul Wiggins ]

paulwiggins · **Posted:** Tue Mar 02, 2004 2:09 am

One other thought, justified copy helps signal editorial/advertising distinction, a nicety often lost in magazines[ March 02, 2004: Message edited by: Paul Wiggins ]

SusanV · **Posted:** Wed Mar 03, 2004 1:47 pm

Babs, for an "informal"--your word--newsletter, ragged is just fine IMO. I've done the volunteer newsletter editor routine for a bunch of organizations over the years, and ragged has always been my choice. It is much easier to read, and, as already noted, gets around the problem of horrible spacing introduced by justification.Regarding bad hyphenation that's systemic, in case you didn't know this, if you have a Word-based program, you can avoid Wayne's broken coach with a discretionary hyph in front of the word. Either it will pull up or it'll drop down. We, at least, also have the option to track, which is probably the most useful feature of all.

majorbabs · **Posted:** Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:54 pm

My usual routine is to turn off the hyphenation, using it only to help me shorten or extend a paragraph for copy-fitting. Another reason why I like ragged right.And you're welcome to view the newsletter (which offers both justified and ragged right columns this issue) at:
www.flatwater.org/news/march04.pdf.But only if you like little British cars and racing...

SusanV · **Posted:** Wed Mar 03, 2004 6:05 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by majorbabs:
My usual routine is to turn off the hyphenation, using it only to help me shorten or extend a paragraph for copy-fitting. Another reason why I like ragged right.And you're welcome to view the newsletter (which offers both justified and ragged right columns this issue) at:
www.flatwater.org/news/march04.pdf. But only if you like little British cars and racing...<hr></blockquote>Oooh, Minis??? Bring it on!The link doesn't work, though.[ March 03, 2004: Message edited by: SusanV ]

pzicari · **Posted:** Wed Mar 03, 2004 10:05 pm

Having read Law 32, I have another question: Are the laws of cricket shorter or longer than the Bible? Would they be comprehensible if they were set ragged right?

paulwiggins · **Posted:** Wed Mar 03, 2004 10:10 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Pete Zicari:
Having read Law 32, I have another question: Are the laws of cricket shorter or longer than the Bible? Would they be comprehensible if they were set ragged right?<hr></blockquote>
Like typography, they are best appreciated through life.

grouch_in_training · **Posted:** Thu Mar 04, 2004 12:56 am

The link to little British racing cars doesn't work because of the period that appears at the end of the hypertext link.http://www.flatwater.org/news/march04.pdfshould take you there.Our paper uses ragged right. My eyes must be used to it, because I think it's much easier to read than justified text. When we first went to it after the last redesign, I thought it was terribly distracting.

Testy Copy Editors

Justified, schmustified

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links