Re: Florin revisited

From: Christopher John Fynn (
Date: Tue Dec 07 1999 - 08:05:01 EST

Otto Stolz <> wrote:
> Likewise, the "f" in an aperture setting, such as "f/5.6", would be
> in italics. It would definitely not be a florin sign, though its glyph
> is similar, if not even indistinguishable from an italic "f".

Publishers specializing in technical books on photography (e.g. Focal Press,
and lens manufacturers *do* use the florin sign for lens apertures. Perhaps
this is
incorrect, but it does seem to have become the de-facto standard. The florin
(ƒ) is easily distinguishable from an italic f in most typefaces used in
modern books
since the italic f usually lacks a tail. The "florin sign" is also slanted
whether or not
it is set as italic.

- Chris

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:56 EDT