Letter spacing

“The decorative effect of lettering is in reality dependent, not on the letters, but on the space about the letters.” So Robert L. Cook opened his chapter on spacing (LM p.122). The rule applies at three scales: the lettering mass within its panel (see inscription design), the space between lines, and the space between individual letters, the subject here.

Equal-looking, not equal

Type set with equal gaps between letters looks uneven. Good spacing makes the spaces appear equal, which means they are rarely equal in area (LM p.123). Cook demonstrated with the word WATER: shading the spaces to exactly equal areas gives a worse result than spacing by eye (LM p.123). That is why mathematical “rules for spacing” have, in his words, no artistic value. They may serve for the commercial block letter, but not for a refined Roman (LM p.123).

Cook’s principles

These points summarize Cook’s historical advice, including his explanation of visual perception.

• Weight the top half. Readers recognize words mostly from the upper halves of the letters, so judge a space more by its top than its bottom. This explains why T can sit closer to A than A sits to W (LM p.124–125).
• Treat open letters as boxes. For E, judge the space from an imaginary line joining the ends of its arms, not from the stem. The following R then comes a little closer still (LM p.125).
• Light bars need less space. Two heavy verticals side by side (H-I) need the most room. A heavy beside a light one (I-N) needs a little less, and two light verticals (N-N) less again (LM p.125).
• Ligatures. Combining awkward pairs, such as L-A, has classic precedent. It should be attempted only by experienced designers, “with caution” (LM p.123, 128).

Elliott’s examples

• L leaves an empty space above its arm. Before A, keep the arm short. Before T, V or W, the arm can be long and sit under their overhang (GMB16 p.594).
• N looks better wide between O and C than between H and L, and its verticals may be slightly heavier there (GMB16 p.594).
• Letters with verticals facing each other (H then E) want a wider gap than rounds facing each other (O then G) (GMB16 p.594).
• The designer’s advantage. Unlike the typesetter, whose letters sit on fixed-width bodies, the designer can vary both the shapes and the gaps. Much of an inscription’s beauty depends on doing so (GMB16 p.594).

Testing a layout

Cook’s checks before a detail leaves the drawing board (LM p.128):

• Turn it upside down and look again at any doubtful spaces.
• Hold tracing paper reversed against a window. The letters lose their meaning and become shapes.
• Blacken the letters and study the detail upright from across the room, or through a reducing lens (a concave lens held about a foot from the eye).
• Ask colleagues, including the cutters. Stone cutters “often have a good eye for lettering.”

See also

• Inscription design
• Optical corrections in lettering
• Roman letters

Sources

• LM p.122–129 (Robert L. Cook).
• GMB16 p.594 (Huger Elliott).

Source and editorial credit

LM publication record · GMB16 publication record.

This is a modern AI-assisted editorial summary. Named contributors are credited with their specific statements above; unidentified contributors remain unverified. Publication editors are not assumed to have written individual articles. Page references use the private scan; source access, edition and rights limitations are recorded in the linked register.