TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Yesterday someone asked me a rather curious question that has to do with LaTeX and typography. Specifically the person is interested in being able to change the font from Times New Roman to thereby saving paper, but in turn that allows write texts with mathematical notation including use of boldface.

He said that read an article about how $400 million (of dollars) could be saved from the government budget in the US if decides to try to use Garamond typeface. In his own case he tries to bringing down the number of pages in his articles changing the font from Times to EBGaramond. The problem with Garamond is, as you should know, the boldface is an invention from the 19th century, and the fashion of the boldfaces still goes on.

But Garamond, or the most typefaces created under that name are designs from the 16th century, a pretty earlier than the union of the bolds to the typographic republic. So, a good design or reconstruction of the Garamond (or Granjon: A typographer with which historically has been confused Garamond's work to the point that many reconstructions currently sold under the name Garamond correspond with the work not of Garamond but Granjon.) work deliberately omits the boldfaces. A good design that is typographically consistent skips boldface when composing the text in Garamond.

Returning to the point, that typography can recommend for this case? It needs consuming less space on paper than Times, but including boldface and allow composing mathematical text with all the necessary notation. As I see the mean language will be English and they use to compile with latexyet.

share|improve this question

closed as off-topic by ChrisS, Peter Jansson, Claudio Fiandrino, Charles Stewart, lockstep Apr 1 '14 at 8:20

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question does not fall within the scope of TeX, LaTeX or related typesetting systems as defined in the help center." – ChrisS, Peter Jansson, Claudio Fiandrino, Charles Stewart, lockstep
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Hmm, a matter of taste... Anyway, tell your friend to look at the LaTeX Font Catalogue. If you look under the serifed fonts section, you can tell at a glance which fonts are 'tighter' than EB Garamond; not many, but what about Venturis ADF No2? Of course, it doesn't have built-in math support, but, then again, neither does EB Garamond... – jon Apr 1 '14 at 4:18
one of the design criteria for times roman was to pack as much text legibly into narrow newspaper columns in small type. it's narrower than most other text typefaces, which is one of the reasons that many math publishers adopted it in the first place. so i doubt that there are many other choices that would save a lot of paper, especially if math is involved. – barbara beeton Apr 1 '14 at 4:20
Did you check the posting Average width of popular TeX fonts? Some of the font families mentioned there do feature a bold weight. Note that saving money by using fewer ink cartridges need not correspond to saving money by using less paper. – Mico Apr 1 '14 at 4:51
Make your friend read this on the subject: thomasphinney.com/2014/03/saving-400m-font – Philippe Goutet Apr 1 '14 at 4:51
The article your friend read was about saving ink, not paper. The statements about ink saving are dubious. (read the link above from Philippe Goutet!), but were never about saving paper, where Times indeed is designed to pack the text tightly. – pst Apr 1 '14 at 5:51