comparing typefaces 2: seria and scala
Template Gothic was not the face of the 1990s (see Blackwell, p144); Scala was. Designed and expanded throughout the decade by
Martin Majoor, Scala is a cohesive Joanna – a fresh, elegant
slab-serif face that is deservedly well-used.
I had used Scala and its unserifed companion successfully in several text
applications in the late 1990s, and so when I opened my FontFont 2000
catalog to find a new face from Majoor – called Seria –
I did not hesitate to download and start setting text.
I quickly realized that Seria was a beautiful, complex typeface, yet I was unsatisfied
with the printed output and didn’t quite know why. And to this day
– still somewhat puzzled – I have yet to find the “right”
application for it. And so I am beginning to investigate...
At first glance, Scala and Seria are essentially the same face by the same
artist; one might conclude initially that several of the lower case
romans appear to differ only in the extent of the ascender or descender.
A closer look, however, reveals that the faces are more like cousins
than twins – of the same pedigree yet distinct in physiognomy.
To compare the two in a sentence, Scala is a chiseled, neoclassical
face with a relatively large x-height; Seria is a humanist-Renaissance
hybrid with its long ascenders and descenders and its modulated stroke.
And to compare them more systematically and in more detail, I have
made some lists of points of differentiation and have included figures
for each major component of both faces.
Lower case roman
In this figure, the lower case romans
of Scala and Seria are shown normalized to x-height. Doing so requires
that Seria be multiplied by about 25%. After normalization, the strokes
of Seria are 15–20% heavier, the letters are 5–15% wider,
and the ascenders and descenders are around 45–55% longer.
But it is not the dimension of Seria’s lower case roman that defines its
character. Rather, it is a motif that is seen throughout the face
– a motif that is established and repeated in the counters.
Begin with c, d, e, and p; you will see that the top-center regions
of the counters are relatively horizontal and straight. As you move
to the left, you see that the bowl thickness sharply increases to
form a counter angle of around 60–70°. A more comprehensive
look will reveal this motif in the ascender of the f and the descender
of the j; indeed, it is present in all letters but b, i, k, l, t,
and v–z.
Another prominent difference between Scala and Seria is in the serifs. Whereas
those of Scala are defined largely by 90° angles, the serifs of
Seria have a concave base with a convex join to the stroke; the letter
k shows this clearly, both in arm and leg.
Other notable features:
- the crossbar of the f also shows the concavity/ convexity
- the rightmost strokes of h, m, and n are not vertical; rather, they
curve inward
- in contrast to Scala, the bowls of b and q completely close the
counters
- the first two stems of w are joined by an extended serif
Lower case italic
“It is true that most romans are upright and most italics slope
to the right – but flow, not slope, is what really differentiates
the two,” writes
Robert Bringhurst (p56). The italics
of Seria serve as a case in point. While the italics of Scala
slope at about 8°, those of Seria do so at only about 1–2°;
nonetheless, there is no mistaking them for roman forms.
One similarity between the italics of the two faces is the distinctive
lower case y, in which the stem of the letter lies to the left, rather
than the right, and the descender is roughly centered. A notable difference
between the two, however, is seen in the letter f, in which that of
Seria breaks away from Scala’s form by extending a straight, serifed
descender below the baseline in a manner a la Jan van Krimpen’s Romanee.
The form of the counters links Seria’s italic to its roman; the aforementioned
motif is preserved and is seen in all letters save i, k, l, s, t,
and v–z.
Upper case roman
The upper case roman in Scala seems
to be about right angles; indeed, stems and serifs in E, F, H, I,
L, and T combine to create perpendicular forms. As expected, there
is more curvature in the upper case romans of Seria. Compare the Ks;
in Seria the arm and leg gracefully curve away from the stem; those
of Scala shoot out linearly. And compare the Rs; the leg of the R
in Seria extends, tapers, and ends well below the baseline. Finally,
note that the angular-counter motif is absent in the upper case.
Also:
- the serifs are more prominent in Seria than in Scala; on letters
such as B and D, they stretch relatively far to the left of the stem
- to achieve equal cap height, Seria must be enlarged by about 15%
- while the bowl of the P is open in Scala, it is closed completely
in Seria
Upper case italic
In Scala, the major distinguishing feature of the italic
caps is the slant; in Seria, the italic caps do not slant at all
but are marked by increased curvature, and some letters approach swash
form – see J, K, N, T, and Y. Note also the prominent tail in Q.
Numerals
The roman numerals in Scala and Seria
are very similar; a major difference is the modulated stroke of the
zero in Seria.
Comparing the italics, those of Seria have
more ornate forms – notice the curl of the descenders of 5 and
7 and the open counters in 8. Compare also the numeral 1, which is
bilaterally serifed in Seria and unilaterally so in Scala.
Andy
Crewdson wrote about Scala and Seria several months back. I forget
some of the particulars, but I do recall his praise for the new face.
I also recall that, as I read, there was no hint of disappointment
in Mr Crewdson’s experience with it. I felt a bit stupid as a result;
why hadn’t I been satisfied with any of my attempts to set text in
Seria?
I believe that the answer may lie in the relationship between the angular beauty
of the face and the conditions under which I normally print. One of
Bringhurst’s principles (6.1.3, p94) is: “Choose faces that
will survive, and if possible prosper, under the final printing conditions.”
Twelve pt at 600 dpi – while perfectly sufficient for Scala
– will simply not do for Seria.
The angular motif, the subtle tapers, and the curvature of Seria’s letterforms
are all there for a reason – to be seen, not smudged. And to
be seen adequately requires high quality in both printer and paper;
this is a typeface that deserves to be treated with the same care
that the designer applied in its creation.
Somewhat equipped with an answer, I’ll continue to investigate, more aware
of Seria’s limitations, and more aware also that its limitations derive
from its exquisite form.
11-August 2002