With the Brause 1.5 mm nib :-
Archive for the Category » The Bedford Psalter – Script Practise «
I’ve done some more pangrams, and am now pretty happy with it all. I do still have to do some sorting out of the ligatures.
I wanted to have a look at which ink would be best. Until now I’ve been using my Art Spectrum, which is fine for general practise, but as a smaller x-height, I want the script to be as clear as possible, so want a good ink.
I tried Ling Lung Copperplate ink, Higgins Eternal, FW Acrylic and Will’s Quills China Black.
The different lines (the last 5) are marked in the practice sheets above.
The Ling Lung gave me the finest hairlines, the crispest lines and was a good black. I did have slight flow problems.
The Higgins was pretty grey and not much better than the AS ink.
The FW Acrylic was good – but I’m reluctant to use an acrylic for practice because I’ll have to keep cleaning my pen. (which is fine if I’m doing a proper piece but not for practise unless I have to). It dried slowly enough that I had enough ink for hairlines but the hairlines weren’t particularily fine.
It was the best black.
The Will’s Quills China Black was second to the Ling Lung. It did occasionally look ‘greasy’ on the paper. It does have a nice shine.
The Ling Lung, being a copperplate ink, just feels so good with the hairlines, which I so often struggle with.
I do really want to try some Sumi ink tho!
The Will’s Quill page with the two Chinese inks I used, plus Sumi inks :
Yowsers, sumi ink is expensive!!
In going to the smaller x-height, I handily already have the guidelines drawn up – I did that back in http://elmsleyrose.blogspot.com/2007/01/script-analysis-drawing-up-guidelines.html
Beard’s (Robert of Stonemarche) comments :-
“I loathe reservoirs, they seem to encourage blobbing.
If you’re writing as slowly as the hand demands, the ink will start to set in the nib, that little coagulated bit of ink screws things up.
The ink will also affect blobbing. It’s all surface tension, if it’s a watery ink, there’s a greater chance of letters blobbing together
If it’s a lacquer style ink, like Sumi, it can congeal on the nib while you’re working. Though, even with that flaw, I think Sumi has a more period look to it on the page, it rises above the paper slightly and has a gloss that I can see in the manuscripts I like).
Regarding blotting, I find that Sumi ink works more or less okay on printer paper. And hitting it up with some Gum Sanderac makes it work quite nicely. (not perfect, but good practice” material)
Since the Will’s Quills page mentions that the Ling Lung ink is a thicker ink, and Beard mentions that with thicker ink (I think this is true as well as for lacquer inks), it can congeal on the nib. Which would explain why I find the flow a bit choked.
I noticed another case for using a particular variant of a letter. I’ve marked the word “wizard” on the second line. There’s a ‘hole’ there. If I’d used the other version of the ‘a’, there’d be less of a hole.
I want to pay attention to the fine lines (eg the bar of the ‘e’). This script is a contrast between the ‘texture’ or heavy weave, and the fine lines.
I also want to get past the point where I am thinking about spacing and letter forms, and be working on the overall beauty of the script. Of which consistency is a big part.
I’ve finished copying the page of the Bedford Psalter.
I could do the other 3 pages that I have. The script there is not as dense, and not as ‘curlicued’ (not one to be seen!) but I think using my list of pangrams (in English) would be more valuable.
If anyone reading this wants my list of pangrams – there are 4 A4 pages of them, including some in Latin and French, and some with lots of S’s – just drop me a note. They are from a cyberscribe originally.
I’ve seen some evolution of my use of the script as I’ve done this practise.
* I’ve decided to do long ‘ticks’ for the apostrophes for the ‘i’s. I was doing a kind of caret thing. Part of the beauty of the script is the heaviness of the letters combined with the lightness of the flourishes and extra bits and pieces, and I think a thin straight line for the apostrophe will fit in better. The apostrophe’s on the source are all sorts of shapes – it’s not a set thing.
* I had to do a “l l” in the practise above and hit a problem – literally. The serifs hit into each other.
It eventually occurred to me that using a variant of the ascender serif – one that didn’t stick out to the sides – would be a good idea in these cases! And also to use such an alternative when descender flourishes of letters from above are hitting into the letter and creating a tangled muddle.
* When analysing the letters I talked about the ‘drip’ from the top of the ‘long s’. I don’t know where that came from! I didn’t find any during the practise. I’ve been using a serif, same as the rest of the letters.
* I’m occasionally going non-straight with my verticals. I think it’s because I’m not moving the page as I go along and so not looking at it straight. At least, I hope that’s the problem.
* I need to watch
- the shape of my ascenders
- the shape of my descenders
- that I don’t do a standard G.T.Q. ‘u’ instead of a B.P. ‘u’
- letter width
- the ticks are placed correctly
- the crossbar of the ‘t’s are straight
- length of first vertical of a versio n 1.
That last line on the page, where it’s a bit too low to write – I hate writing on that line! I think I’ll waste some paper and finish further up, rather than doing twisted wrist acrobatics.
I cracked it regarding the ink blotting on the paper I was using (printer paper), so invested in a pad of bleedproof paper. I’m MucH happier working on it. Tho I do have a bit of a problem smudging words – the ink tends to sit on top of the paper for longer, and take longer to dry.
I’ve re-written the top half of the page – all of the section I’ve worked on so far during the first 4 script practises :-
Thinking of them in this way (a way to get back up to the top of the line) has helped me in writing them.
It also occurred to me that they have a use as a space filler (which I talked about last post) and to help identify letters like ‘u’ and ‘ii’ and ‘n’. The tick being on the left hand side at the start of the letter is a dead give away.
I’m going to make an executive decision here. I think the tick attached to the bottom diamond of an ‘r’ looks silly. It crosses across too much empty space. I want to do one at a more acute angle, heading up towards the point of the bow of the ‘r’ rather than trying to reach the next letter
My ticks tend to be too vertical in general. When i go to write the next letter, I find that it’s bottom diamond won’t connect with the last letter’s tick, coz the tick is too high at that point.
I noticed, on the first line of the Bedford P page, that the scribe has written the ‘o’ so that it’s bottom didn’t quite meet the baseline. So he added a cute little cheat.
I was also looking at Knight’s script analysis of the Bedford P, and was glad to seeing the following comment :
The interesting bit being “the LOWER diamonds to be elongated to a point”.
I was thinking the upper diamonds were elongated as well, but never succeeded in getting them so.
Another thing stated somewhere (in Drogin?) is the trick of covering the top half of the letters, and seeing what the bottom half looks like. It should be all verticals and diamonds, with the occasional quadrant, and the occasional 30 degree quadrant (eg for the bottom of an “o”). It should look regular, to give the ‘textura’ or ‘woven’ pattern.
There’s also the trick of turning it upside down and looking for the pattern then.
I haven’t got it perfect yet. Something to aim for, tho I don’t know if perfection is actually achievable.
Still have to watch the width (counterspace) of my letters – a (version 2), d, p and o in particular.
I marked up the practise I did in Script Practise 2 :-
The 1 p.w. spacing between the letters was pretty good.
The problems were
* I’m not turning my pen back to 45 degrees after doing a diamond at 60 degrees, so the verticals are too skinny.
* the spacing between the words is a bit variable – generally being too large.
Note : looking at the Bedford P, the 1 p.w. spacing between two words seems to have the following rule :
if the first word ends in a hook serif, (eg u, i, n, m, a, c, e, f, l etc) and the second word starts with a hook serif : the 1 p.w. is measured from the end of that last hook serif of the first word to the start of the hook serif on the first letter of the next word, not the last and first vertical (as you’d think).
This can give what appears to be inconsistent inter-word spacing, if you don’t take the serifs into account, or they are faintly written.
if one or other of the two words has a hook serif but the other doesn’t : the 1 p.w. space is measured between the serif and the vertial (eg —-d u—–, or —-n g—)
if neither the first word ends in a hook serif, nor the second word start with one : the 1 p.w. is measured between the verticals (eg —-g b—-, or —–h c—–)
This also applies to pen flourishes (tho they tend to be below the baseline) and punctuation.
Gosh, that took a lot of words to explain!
I did another line, thinking about this issues as I went. It’s a bit better, but I’m really tired at the moment, so it’s not brilliant.
I’m not being picky, noticing all these errors. I don’t want to get into the habit of doing the wrong thing, and then having to unlearn the incorrect habit and re-learn the right way later on.
It is a bit like patting my head and rubbing my tummy as I write tho, as I have so many things to think about.
I’m using the Bedford P page as a source at the moment, as it’s basically a ‘cheat sheet’ showing everything correctly (except where the scribe made mistakes *grin*). I’ll move onto pangrams and other sentences later.
I’m trying to strike a balance between not copying the same sentence too many times (and hence just learning those particular combinations of letters), and writing it often enough that the corrections stick in my brain instead of getting lost as I get distracted by new mistakes and issues.
I was looking at the first script practise with Kit today, and she thought all of my verticals were crooked.
It turned out that
1) The margin on the right hand side was slightly crooked; and
2) I’d scanned the page slightly crookedly.
My verticals were actually straight (except the long s in the second word, last line, which leans forward a bit).
I never look at the RHS margin. I’m left handed. I don’t know if that’s why – but I don’t look at the right hand margin unless I’m considering whether a word will fit on the end of the line or not.
I’ve done more practise since :-
Tomorrow I’ll look at the spacing of the letters and words.
As a general plan, I’m going to
* work on the script, sorting out various mistakes
* finish the script analysis
(I looked at Drogin today, and found a majuscule set that matches the majuscules that appear on one of the pages of the Bedford Psalter I’ve got. That was a bit easy!)
* do the analysis of the illumination (see Mistress Rowan Perigrynne’s paper “Analysing a Style”, step 3 onwards, at http://www.sca.org.au/scribe/articles/analysing.htm )
which will be a lot more fun, and a lot easier and quicker than the script analysis
* select a piece of writing and practise it.
* produce a piece using the writing and the style (script, layout and illumination) of the Bedford Psalter.
* do some more casual, smaller pieces using the script and illumination and have a bit of fun.
* have a bit of an explore of historical and maybe even modern gothic textura quadrata styles in general (just exploring them, not script analysis of them)
* move onto the next historical script analysis that Paul Antonio recommended – Gothic Textura Prescisus, and repeat all of the above, including doing the script analysis a lot more quickly second time around since I know what i’m doing now
and then do it again for Gothic Rotunda.
And then Bastard Secretary, and the Batarde hands – but that will be a couple of years off!
I’ve still got a bit of script analysis to do (like decide on a set of majuscules, and reminding myself of the ligature rules) but I really wanted to write.
I’m very pleased with how it’s going, and I’ve learnt a lot already, from putting the letters together.
I was having problems with the ink spreading. Pouncing wasn’t fixing it. I eventually changed my ink bottle for a clean bottle and fresh ink. The old ink was partially clotted, and had had water added to it to thin it a few times – the proportions of binder to pigment were probably all wrong, because it solved the problem, half way down the page.
* Angles * After the first couple of lines, I went back and marked the 45 degree (and a few 30 degree, where relevant) angles.
I found that I needed to smarten them up a bit. I’m not too worried. Looking at Historical Source Book for Scribes angle-marked up extract of the Bedford Psalter, the angles were all over the place. But still – aiming for correctness is a good thing.
* Vertical Line Spacing * I did all that practise on getting my vertical lines evenly spaced, one pen width apart, using Drogin’s “Gods of Snow” quote.
I could feel it kicking it as I did this script practise.
It’s not perfect, of course. I’ve just marked up the edge of a piece of paper with the correct line spacing, and will start using it to check the spacing in my next lot of practice.
* E, C, R and T * Given the verticals are evenly spaced, I’ve noticed that the letters following the ‘e’ and ‘c’, ‘r’ and ‘t’ need to be placed right up against that letter, because of their empty space to their right hand side.
I’ve also noticed that the crossbar of the ‘t’ is longer than I thought – extending to the start of the next letter. Which makes sense. If it’s 1 p.w. on the righthand side, and the letters are one p.w. apart …..
* Ligatures * I’ve started doing a few ligatures. The empty space caused by a letter with a vertical on it’s right hand side, followed by a letter with a vertical on it’s right hand side (eg ‘b’ ‘e’) looked a bit sad. (I wonder if that is the rule for what is ligatured? My brain is kind of full at the moment but I’ll have to think about it)
* Margin Serifs * I’ve noticed that the first letter of the first word from the left hand margin of the page have a hook serif to begin with (unless the letter starts with a vertical, like ‘l’ or ‘b’) to give the letter a little ‘breathing room’ rather than being pushed up against the margin.
* Left Hand side Serifs * That letters starting with a diamond, that follow a letter ending in a vertical, have a hook serif added on the left hand side.
Like ‘d’ followed by ‘u’.
Because the ‘d’ ends in a vertical, there is empty space of one pen width (sometimes this is avoided by using a ligature but not for all letter combinations) before the ‘u’ starts. The ‘d’ doesn’t finish in a hook serif. So the ‘u’ has a hook serif on it’s left to fill up the space.
* I don’t like the descender serif (the fishtail as a descender). There are a few alternatives – I’m going to work on using another version.
Seeing problems in my script is a bit like shooting fish in a barrel right now.
I’ve written a couple more – the “aardvark” pangram again, and the first couple of lines from the mss page I’m basing the script analysis from.
I haven’t done any intermediary practice since the last sentences I wrote, and put in the last post – I used the rest of that page for warmup strokes. And I can see some improvements
My spacing is just completely up the creek!
I think the ‘cursive’ affect achieved by the serifs emenating (sp?) from letters finishing in a diamond hitting into the bottom diamond/quadrants of the following letter is interesting.
Even tho this is a LOT more fun, I need to go back and do that final, (well, sometimes I think – semi-final – I’m still seeing more, but I’ve got to stop at some point) list of ‘features of the letters I’ve discovered” or else it won’t get done. It’s boring, but I want to have a reference list with all my info on the letters all together.
And have a look at a few more features of the script (as described in my list of script analysis questions) but there isn’t too much more. And it’s questions on issues I haven’t looked at yet (like the type of majuscules used).