Typophile - experience with Baskerville Book? - Comments

What about Adobe’s

mondoB — Sat, 3 May 2008 19:34:42 -0700

What about Adobe’s OpenType version of ITC New Baskerville?...crisper, bigger, more contrasted, and thus more legible than the lower-contrast Baskervilles from Storm, fine as those families are. And the Adobe OT version gives you full glyph coverage, including OSFs, and better kerning, on the whole. I’ve always preferred the more contrasted Baskervilles over the less contrasted ones...just wears better for reading.

I actually think the BQ

EssDee — Sat, 3 May 2008 13:41:43 -0700

I actually think the BQ version’s emdash is shorter than Adobe’s. If you’re shopping for Baskervilles, I recommend taking a serious look at Stormtype’s Baskerville and Baskerville 10.

experience with Baskerville Book?

metroave — Thu, 1 May 2008 05:38:29 -0700

Can anyone tell me about the differences (if any) between the Adobe version of Berthold Baskerville Book and the BQ version? I’m currently using the Adobe (for book text, 11/15), but I need OsF and real small caps, so I want to buy the expert fonts that include them. I’m wondering if I should just buy the expert add-ons, or whether the BQ version of the rest of the font would be worth it, too. I’m wondering, is the kerning any better? Are there additional ligatures? Also, I find the em-dash on this font to be quite small. My proofreaders mistake it for an en-dash, and I’ve had to swap out the em-dash for another font. I wonder if it’s any bigger in the BQ version.

I tried emailing the US Berthold vendor, but they don’t respond.

Many thanks!
Heather