Something that never occurred to me after all my years of looking at countless manuscript pages was how line endings in historic times were made to look so perfect. I have always been a stickler for spelling and basic grammar rules, and have always had in my mind the rule that you NEVER separated a word at the end of a line unless it was at a syllable, prefix or suffix point. Seeing manuscript pages use line fillers always justified an uneven edge that could be evened up with a design. And it is the reason my calligraphy pieces look so crappy, I think.
After some research, I am surprised and a bit embarrassed to admit that it never occurred to me that Medieval scribes split words anywhere - sometimes after a single letter, or with only a letter or two to go - to justify their line edges. They only used line fillers at the clear and definite end of a sentence.
Duh
Seeing so many examples of all of your work on this subreddit has caused me to try to better what I had always practiced and rethink a lot of what I do. So thank you.
Of course, things written in Latin had far greater wiggle room that things written in languages that you want easily read today. So I think that if I am going for pure artistic merit, or getting something as close to a Medieval piece as possible, I will start splitting words anywhere to justify the end of a line. But if I am going for both art and readability, I will stick to my line filler technique, as both have their merit.
Open for discussion on this, so please, let's hear your thoughts.