Mark Bertrand feels strongly that if Bibles are for reading, the text should be in single columns:
Why am I so passionate about single column settings? It's simple, really. Books we read are set in single columns. Books we look stuff up in are set in double columns. Reading = single. Reference = double. ....
Some of you are already single column converts. Others cling tenaciously to the traditional double column look. .... The good news is, for those of you who've been waiting for well-designed, proportional single column text settings of the Bible in a wide variety of translations, there is light.
I don't care. Just give me the word. Format doesn't matter.
ReplyDeleteMy study Bible is double column. The book introductions are standard single column. I read both. :)
Obviously, whatever the format, reading it is the most important. But I find Bertrand's argument persuasive - and if you are going to buy a new Bible worth taking into consideration.
ReplyDeleteI like his point. But it really does depend on the width of the page. Newspapers and magazines are multi column and are certianly meant for reading.
ReplyDeleteWhen I am printing something for reading, I shrink the margins and go to 2 columns. I find the narrower columns easier to read with the 7.5" reading width (between the margins).
However, a 5" page could easily be read in a single column, probably much easier than 2 narrow columns.
So I guess I'm pro-choice in this matter.
I think they could make it even more readable by going with a ragged right, instead of fully justified text. That would also address some of his concerns with type layout on a wider line.
ReplyDeleteBut regardless, making the choice an inform and deliberate choice rather than not considering it at all, is a valuable concept.
The picture is from my current [and perhaps permanent] Bible - an ESV with the notes in the gutter where they are accessible but don't really affect the readable space. I very much like the single column, paragraphed format.
ReplyDelete