Posted on 09/11/2004 1:46:40 AM PDT by The Bandit
Talked back and forth with a typewriter collector named Chuck who lives in Redlands, CA. He happened to have a working IBM Selectric Composer Typewriter circa 1972! Here is the scoop I got from him....
IBM had a Roman font element, he said it was called "Aldine Roman." The element I guess is what we been calling a golf ball on here! He said it is very similar to MS New Roman, in fact ALMOST identical. BUT, he said the IBM element Roman font had a observable difference in the capital C. He says he does not see a IBM Selectric Composer Typewriter element C in the Killian memo's. He also said if the memo's line up exactly with text from MS Word then he would be very, very suspicious of the source.
About the superscript, he said it could be done but not exactly like it shows in in the memo's AND would take effort, not something he'd expect a unexperienced typist using a such a new type of machine.
Bottom line: memo's did not come from a IBM Selectric Composer Typewriter.
I am beat after all this, good night and hope this info is useful!
If you look at a copy of The Times (of London), you'll see the original version of the font.
The font has an interesting history. This scandal just adds to it.
I don't know without being able to control more of the variables like how often it was scanned or faxed and printed, etc. I'm just going on my own experiences in doing OCR (optical character recognition) from photocopies and adjustments I've needed to make to improve accuracy of the converted text. Perhaps I'll do an experiment.
I'm sure you'd agree, the biggest problem we've all had is the lack of access to the "original" documents (CBS included).
We're so thoroughly accustomed nowadays to computer technology that when we think of copy degradation we think of it in terms of lower resolution. But devices like a copy machine actually cause image "gain" with successive generations, because they use a physical process.
On a separate forum, run by typesetters and printer groups, Bouffard has specifcally been quoted (by a phone interview to the webmaster) that the statements attributed to him by the Boston Gloabe are wrong, taken out of context, and do NOT represent his conclusions.
Has anybody actually TYPED these things on a manual typewriter?
If they did, could you superimpose the images?
Don't forget the use of a P.O. box in the typed, center-justified "letterhead", or the box number itself, "34567". Pretty suspicious, to say the least... Would a National Guard unit use a P.O. box on an internal memo? And if so, what are the odds of the box number being "34567". The only way it could be a MORE obvious fake is if the box number had been "12345", and the town was "Anytown, USA".
The font is Microsoft Word's "Times New Roman", period. I've spent several hours comparing various characters (letters, numerals, and punctuation) between my copy of Word, and the CBS "memos".
Little characteristic details match to a "t" (no pun intended), but differ distinctively when compared to other MS fonts (including the Palatino Linotype that the Flash animation used -- it's close to TNR font, but provably differs in the details), or TNR fonts from other machines or makers.
For just one example, the "head" of the lowercase "f" is distinctively and markedly different (in size, curve, and angle) between the memo's "f's" and other possible 1972-era TNR "f's" -- but the same as the MS-Word "f".
Yes.
If they did, could you superimpose the images?
Here you go:
Black is the CBS memo, red is the same text typed with an IBM Selectric Composer, the very high-end machine used by publishers and professional composers (no one in their right mind would get one for typing memos).
After adjusting for the mismatched line spacing (by sliding the lines around in Photoshop), they *still* don't match up right:
As for the infamous superscript, here's what it took to accomplish it on the Composer (and it *still* didn't match right):
To make the superscripted th, I first typed "111", then switched the font to the 8pt font, switched the escapement lever to the smaller escapement (horizontal movement), reverse indexed the paper 1/2 line up, typed the "th", indexed 1/2 line down, switched the escapement lever to the wider escapement, then changed the type ball back to the 11pt font. On other tries, I was able to produce the superscripted th much cleaner (where it looked proper), but on the one I sent you, the carrier slipped forward a little bit when I switched the escapement lever to and from the smaller spacing.Can you imagine anyone going through all that trouble to type a superscripted "111th" on a simple memo, when just using "111th" without a superscript would have been perfectly adequate and readable?
The above examples and quote were borrowed from http://shapeofdays.typepad.com/, which also has much more excellent analysis on the same topic.
Compare the above mess, which creates substantial mismatches even with identical font type and point sizing, with the beautiful match that occurs when comparing the CBS memo against a MS-Word version of the document, and you'll see why the degree of match is a dead giveaway of the forgery -- due to the fact that the same typeface rendered by different companies or sources (mechanical or electronic) are inevitably rendered differently, due to the multitude of "stylistic" choices possible in posititioning, stroke details, etc.
The only way to get an effortless, nearly flawless match (as between the CBS memo and the MS-Word printouts) is if THEY ORIGINATED FROM THE SAME SOURCE.
The CBS memos came from MS-Word. QED. And therefore, they are forgeries.
"I'll stand by my assertion (based on twenty years as a professional typesetter) that the type on the documents is not Times Roman, nor is it Palatino, as others have suggested."
I see by your profile that we share some common interests. I have a thirty year background in printing equipment sales and service. I repaired small offset presses and have seen the Composer in use, did you ever know anyone to use a Composer as an office typeWRITER as opposed to a typeSETTER which it was designed to be? I suppose a printer might occasionally have done so but I can't imagine a guard base having a typeSETTER instead of a typeWRITER.
"Was that Selectric Composer an expensive typewriter in its time?"
The Composer was designed and sold as a typeSETTER, not a typeWRITER, it cost about the same as a new Chevy at the time, possibly a little more. If you don't know the difference between a writer and a setter talk to a printer in your area, all this talk about Composers is just to distract those who have no knowledge of printing or typesetting.
"I used one of those IBM composer typewriters for about an hour once, in about '78. They were not for typing. They were for setting copy for offset printers."
Thank you, I have spent a lot of time trying to get across exactly this point, using a Composer for office typing makes as much sense as driving a farm tractor to the grocery store.
Well, I'm not so proud that I can't back off if the situation warrants it. Yes, whatever font was used on those memos seems to have a square serif, which a Dutch oldstyle like Times Roman isn't supposed to have. But since the space values match up identically with those of Times New Roman in an MS word document, I've had to ask myself if perhaps I'm not mistaken. All I can think is that successive generations of photocopying lent so much "gain" to the originals that the usually-bracketed serifs of Times Roman simply appear to be rectangular. I did a little experiment with photocopying, and found that this was, indeed, the case. That's the only way I can explain things at this point. If I could see the originals, I'd know for sure.
I agree that it's highly unlikely a composing machine like the Composer would have been used as a simple office machine; nor would it have been used by a person who by all accounts was no typist, to produce copy that has no ostensible corrections. The whole thing beggars the imagination.
The fact that these are such obvious fakes indicates to me that whoever is responsible for making them public wanted them to be seen as fakes.
Yep, and there is no mention of how rare the composer was back then. The lunacy of this is beyond belief. They're forgeries and it's about time Dan got canned.
Hallmark channel has been rerunning Perry Mason weekdays from 2:00-4:00 P.M. CDT; wouldn't it be convenient if "The Case of the Missing Element" aired this week?
See brochure here
The composer is a typesetter intended for a graphics department, to produce text to be incorporated in things like brochures and advertisement hard copy. The typesetter creates the text of the page, with blank areas where the pictures and graphics are to go. The pics are glued on, and the whole thing gets photographed and input to a photo-offset or lithographic printer. (I used to work in places with internal print departments, so I have vague familiarity with the techniques of the 70's, but I'm not an expert in the details)
Bottom line: a composer was a specialized piece of equiptment for professional printer-types. NOT something you would see a LTC type a memo on (unless he commanded a print shop)
Yup, and there is no mention of the fact that the composer was a typesetter and not a typewritter. Why did a NG office need a typesetter in 1972?
Apparently the squared serifs are a result of repeated copying of the original document or digital blurring.
They didn't and they didn't have one. This is really a travesty that Rather doesn't just take his medicine on this.
There was most certainly both kerning and ligatures ("fi" and "fl" rendered as one glyph instead of two). That CYA was poorly kerned is just characteristic of the sloppy kerning you'll find on most PC fonts. They're hardly professional typesetting quality where things like kerning are concerned; they don't have to be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.