Final context books

Here are my final context books. I'm really happy with them, unfortunately I left the actual production of these books a little late in the day.It means rather than trialing a load of different paper stocks to see which one would work the best, I'm goign to have to pick some stocks from the library. Not ideal but all my fault. I want two different colours of stocks: 1 that is a little lighter for the designers and type is art books so photographs stand out against them much better, and one thats a bit darker, to make the type manuals seem a little bit more industrial.

Open publication - Free publishing

Open publication - Free publishing

Open publication - Free publishing

Open publication - Free publishing

Belly band to hold them altogether:

Open publication - Free publishing

So, how did this project go? pretty well and I found it very valuable as an asset in me growing as a designer. Both i terms of having the contact studios (even though a lot didn't get back in touch) in terms of getting to know and understand typefaces I've regularly worked with a lot better, and in terms of understanding type as a skill and a beautiful art form.

Weaknesses: I put this together a bit late in the day so it wasn't managed as well as it could have been I guess, but that's just the way it is sometimes.

Design context book research.

I have to be honest, I did a lot of research for the 10 serif and sans serif typefaces on the internet without really recording what I was doing. This was a pretty stupid thing to do. I wasn't thinking, but it's very late in the day now and I can't dedicate time to tracking down every website I used. I will say that most of the information was found by googling the typeface and looking for profiles on it, and then also discussions and interviews on the typefaces. Where I've used quotes in the book, I have credited the source as I was going a long. I know this isn't ideal and its poor documentation but frankly this fmp is starting to grind me down and I just need to get on with it whilst having as little as possible limiting me.

Context book development

Here are some pdfs of the way the layout is developing. I managed to set quite a rigid structure earlier so it was quite easy to stick to it, mostly it was changing the way images were laid out and ensuring that the typography was type. Having quotes was a useful device and I'm grateful to all of the designers that I asked who contributed answers:

Open publication - Free publishing

I used this template for the 10 excellent type designers book, so it was another case of pushing images around the page, so I haven't documented that, which is stupid really.

Finalising the content of my context publications

OK I need to finalise exactly what is going into my book from the research that I've been doing, so lets do this book by book:

Book 1, 05 reasons that type is an art form

(was going to be 10, but after 5 I found myself repeating)

Introduction (description of why I'm doing this book)

Definition of art

Reason 01, Type is part of fine art, Barbara Kruger example

Reason 02, Typefaces are creative output (highlight with examples of typefaces who have particular quirks to letterforms, garamond, baskerville, futura)

Reason 03 Typefaces can say alot, basically how a typeface communicates more than just the letters it portrays, connotations etc. and how they are manipulated expertly

Reason 04 What's acceptable evolves, how conventions and boundaries change and are pushed like fine art a lot. (Simon Garfield quote)

Reason 05 Type designers use such skill; highlight all of the skills and technicalities involved in creating a typeface.

Conclusion.


Book 2 10 sans serif works of art

With each one use quotes and what learned to identify why each typeface is unique and important

01 futura
02 gill
03 univers
04 franklin gothic
05 optima
06 avant garde
07 helvetica
08 gotham
09 VAG rounded (first rounded typeface)
10 Johnston


Book 03, 10 excellent type designers

01 Sagmeister (hand done type, important use interview materials)
02Catalog
03 Chevy Chase
04 RAW (use interview materials)
05 Build
06 Consult
07 One Nine Four (use interview stuffs)
08 Aurele Sack (Use interview stuff)
09 Construct
10 Music (use interview stuff)

Book 04, 10 serifs

01 Georgia
02 Baskerville
03 Garamond
04 Rockwell
05 Bodoni
06 Palatino
07 Caslon
08 Minion
09 Cambria
10 Goudy Old Style

And there I have a nice set of arguments, designers and important historical typefaces!

Context books layouts

Here are some proposed layouts for my book. I decided to have everything reversed out because the layouts look much richer this way. There's some development stuff that I will upload at some other point but right now my eyes are bleeding so this is it.

Open publication - Free publishing

Open publication - Free publishing

Typohpile discussion: Is type design/typography art?

I started a discussion on the typophile website about whether type design is art and I think some of the commentary is quite appropriate to my context book. Because a lot fo these people are typographers, it's quite a well informed set of views. Here are some relevant (anonymous) extracts:

"Actually, I think it is, but there are others who tend to think art with a "A" is grander than what a nicely crafted set of glyphs can offer.

in the end, art is a verdict."

"Type design* is art in it's most basic sense: black and white, positive and negative, mass and void. And yet ... type is most definitely a tool. It can be flawed if it isn't coherent or lacks in technical quality.

*Designing typefaces is not typography."


"Typography and type design are properly Design rather than Art. Of course at the same time, Art can repurpose any other discipline, and typography can be seen as art by typographers. But for me, type design and typography are responses to design questions, fulfilling a brief or seeking to solve aesthetic questions with elegance; therefore it's based on a slightly different premise to Art, which seems to centre on creating something in itself."

"I think I could agree that typography is more of a science than an art. So much of it is objective with defined rights and wrongs. However type design is very subjective and an art. What is so right today can be declared so wrong tomorrow, but there is never absolute agreement on that by anyone. If type design isn’t an art, there would have never been the extended discussion recently on why so many people hate Comic Sans."

"I consider typography a craft, like most areas of design. The sole reason for that is because they have a functional component as well as an artistic one. So by this same criterion the following are crafts and not art as such: architecture, clothing design, graphic design, furniture design..."

"I consider crafts to be activities which require a specialized skills--such as basketweaving or macramé--which can, at times, produce objects of great beauty as well as utility. By your definition, to be considered Art, an activity must serve no practical purpose (lacks a "functional component"), which seems to me to impoverish both Art and ourselves."


I think this one is important because it talks about the Beatrice Warde quote I referenced earier from the 'Just My Type' book:

"I read a quote (and it's a commonly held belief) that typography is best when it functions without being noticed

Disagree. Of course typography is supposed to be noticed. But in a manner similar to a movie set: it's not the focus of the scene, but it enhances what's happening in the foreground. And if it's poorly made or inapt, you'll definitely notice.

The idea that "printing should be invisible" is most directly traceable to Beatrice Warde's "Crystal Goblet" essay from 1955. While the essay has a few good points to make, its core premise — that "invisibility" is the defining virtue of typography — is flat wrong. (Wrong on metaphorical grounds too: go to a decent wine bar and you'll see crystal goblets of different shapes being used for different kinds of wine.) It's long past time for typographers, and typographic educators especially, to pour concrete into Warde's "Goblet" and toss it overboard.

Some defend Warde by saying that her thesis was not so extreme — that she only meant that typography should be suited to the text. A fine idea, but what part of Warde's essay supports this interpretation? If anything, she goes out of her way to reinforce the "invisibility" theme:

But a good speaking voice is one which is inaudible as a voice. It is the transparent goblet again! I need not warn you that if you begin listening to the inflections and speaking rhythms of a voice from a platform, you are falling asleep.

Does this statement make any sense at all?

Warde's essay mostly illustrates the perils of latching onto an appealing but inapt metaphor: everything you deduce from that metaphor will also be wrong."

This argument is a good one that suggests that typography is more than just a technical craft because it enhances the work. It's something I think will form the core of my argument.

Reply from Lino type

Linotype got back in touch with me in regards to the copyright copy type brief. I've discontinued the brief, but some of the answers are particularly useful for the context publication.

"Copyright will only in very few cases (exceptional artistic quality of a typeface – my favorite example is “Zapfino”) protect the typeface design as such. My feeling is that typeface designs should be protected in many more cases because even typefaces for daily use can display great creativity even if the differences lie in the small details." Is an interesting quote that suggests her mind is on a similar to mine in regards to type ebing an art form. This quote will be useful in terms of teh 'reasons why type is art' book.

Hello Ben:

Please allow me to introduce myself as European Legal Counsel of Linotype GmbH, a subsidiary of Monotype Imaging. Linotype and Monotype Imaging hold one of the worldwide largest font software portfolios. The answers I give below, however, are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the company.

Firstly, as you see it, do you feel well protected by the copyright law concerning
typeface design?

Copyright will only in very few cases (exceptional artistic quality of a typeface – my favorite example is “Zapfino”) protect the typeface design as such. My feeling is that typeface designs should be protected in many more cases because even typefaces for daily use can display great creativity even if the differences lie in the small details. However, I believe it is unlikely that a “copyright policy” that has evolved in many jurisdictions (most of Europe and USA, for instance) which denies copyrightability to (most) typefaces over the past 5 decades is likely to change in the near future. Israel set a different example and just last year accepted that typefaces could enjoy copyright protection, but the legal framework in Europe and the US seems to be well established.

Therefore, we work on the basis that the typefaces are not protected and rely on the protection that is available to us, namely design patents, trademark and the copyright in the font software.

What do you see as the main flaws of the way the law works to protect you as a designer?

The main “flaw” – if one can call it that – is that only very few people can judge the creativity of a typeface and, therefore, courts and the legislative have decided that a typeface will usually not be protectable by copyright.

Do you see the main problem as plagiarism or piracy?

Plagiarism in typefaces is very hard to enforce due to the lack of copyright protection explained above and the difficulty to enforce design patents in court. From my perspective, though, trademarks indirectly help to protect designs which are established in the market. For that reason and because we mainly deal in licensing rights to font software we consider piracy the greater problem.

Why do you feel so many people are willing to appropriate typefaces without the
artist/designer's permission?

I believe one must distinguish the Customer/Designer and the Designer/Designer relationships. With regard to the first relationship: As in the record industry or other creative business, many people do not understand or recognize the substantial efforts that are necessary to create intellectual property. This leads to the customer’s impression that such IP (in our case font software) is overprized and they look for “alternative ways” to acquire it.

In creative arts, it is very common that one artist bases his/her work on existing works. The copyrights laws recognizes this with citation rights. In the typeface Designer/Designer relationship I believe the problem lies in the fact that the creative scope is somewhat more limited that in some other artistic fields (which admittedly is one of the reasons that the legislators and courts have such a hard time to recognize copyright protection for typeface designs). This is supported by statements by (very renown) designers like Erik Spiekermann who openly admits that his design approach is to look at existing typefaces, close his eyes and “re-invent” that typeface with improvements.

How do you feel would be the best way to resolve this ongoing problem? Does it come from a
change in legislation, or an attempt to change people's attitudes...?

I believe a change in legislation is rather unlikely and therefore we concentrate our business efforts to (a) change people’s attitudes by explaining the value of typefaces (marketing) and (b) using the existing legal framework to address infringements and thus discourage further infringements.

I hope this helps your project.

Yours sincerely,
Jan

Dr. Jan Kaestner, Solicitor
European Legal Counsel

Linotype GmbH
A Monotype Imaging Company
Werner-Reimers-Straße 2-4
61352 Bad Homburg
Germany

Phone +49 6172 484 410
Fax +49 6172 484 5410
jkaestner@linotype.com
www.linotype.com

Geschäftsführer/Managing Director: Frank Wildenberg
Sitz Bad Homburg, HRB 10375, Amtsgericht Bad Homburg - Commercial Register of the Bad Homburg Local Court, HRB 10375

This e-mail message and any accompanying documentation is intended for the addressee only and may contain legally privileged and confidential information. If you are not the addressee any use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify us immediately by reply e-mail or telephone call on +49 6172 484 401 and delete this e-mail from your systems.

Case Study: Aurele Sack

Not a studio but an individual designer, one who makes beautiful typefaces. I emailed him and asked him a few questions, not many (he was busy so I guess that worked out well, because I would have scared him off.) Geared towards what I'm looking at for my context book.

On 19 May 2011, at 13:08, Aurele Sack wrote:

Hello,

Thanks for your mail and your interest.
I'm pretty busy so I'm gonna ask quickly.

I think that typeface design is not an art for me.
And when I'm designing a typeface, I'm just trying to be logical, mathematical, a bit geometrical. etc... I think
that if a typeface is correctly drawn on a logical grid, it will work well for sure.

Thanks and best regards,
Aurele


Le 20 mai 11 à 00:41, Ben Bowsher a écrit :

Hi

I'm a big fan of the typefaces you design, particularly 'Fleurie', which has some excellent flourishes.
I was wondering whether I could ask you a few questions about your practice:

Firstly, do you view type design as an art form?

When designing typefaces, do you have a particular philosophy?

Thanks and keep up the good work!

Ben Bowsher
Graphic Design


It was interesting that his views on type were so absolutely different to mine. I understand what he means by it being a science but I disagree. Anyway, this is something extremely interesting in terms of feeding into my context publication, I definitely have a use for it.

More relevant quotes

Here are some other relevant type quotes that I can and want to use (excuse the terrible gif, I didn't make them):











Aside form lame images, all of these say a lot of good things in terms of my argument that typography is art and they can all be used in one way or another, though they may not make it to the final books, they have definitely informed my view at least to some degree.

Quotes from "Just My Type" Part 2

"Much of what one needs to know about the history and beauty of a typeface can be found in it's Ampersand"

It's a quote that can be applied to a practical choice in my context book (using the ampersand as the large letterform on the page, although this could be repetative and limiting) but also makes a point about the craft and detail that goes into individual letters. The ampersand of italicised garamond for example is very different to that of regular baskerville, though they're both similarly legible typefaces, there is a uniqueness and beauty to certain letterforms.

Noteble examples of this:

-Any pointed letter in futura, the A, W, M, N etc, as well as the O show the beatifully geometric shapes that it was based upon.

-The horse-tail like 'Q' in Baskerville. Which flows beautifully and elegantly.

-The 'W' in Garamond who's bars cross over rather than meeting in the middle, forming a shape now recogniseable as the 'VW' logo

There are others and I should get them for my type book as they would be good display letters to show what I mean when I'm talking about the beauty of individual typefaces.

Back to the book:

When talking about Helvetica and Univers: "They would sort out not just transport systems, but whole Cities"

I guess what's important about this quote is the demonstration of the power of type. It's ability to simplfy and make travel easier, to effect the day to day. This makes it beyond art, it is a vital function. The fact that it is beyond art at once makes it art. It's value when got right is so huge and significant, it's craft can only ever be considered an art.

On Gotham: "There are some typefaces that read as if everything written in them is honest."

Again a point already made about the power a typeface has to communicate beyond the basic letterforms themselves.

I think there's enough here, but I'll add more if I stumble upon any biggies upon reading. These quotes are going to be significant in the first book of my set "reasons type is an art"

Quotes from "Just My Type"

Firstly apologies about how ridiculously all over the place the typefaces are in the last post (such irony isn't it?), copying and pasting the appropriate quotes fro other pages caused no end of coding nightmares that I can't be bothered to go in and fix at this stage (as long as it's just about readable, right?).

I got the book "Just My Type" by Simon Garfield for Christmas from my brother and read it cover to cover, some of the quotes in it are very pertinent to the argument 'type is art'. Here are some of the best and most appropriate to the argument:

"Some type vocabulary has an internal beauty of it's own... Much of this is anthropomorphic, treating letters as living life forms..."

I guess I like this quote because it highlights the craft involved and the loving nature of the relationship between a typographer and the letterforms he works with. It's almost the same as a sailor calling his ship 'old girl' or something similar. Whilst not strictly suggesting that typography is art, it does suggest the beauty (and what is art but beauty) of typography.

"As with Fashion,, the design of Typography is an alarmingly vibrant art form. It refuses ossification. Like the wildest genres of modern art, it is the newest things that upset the traditionalists."

"The theory that the most legible font is the most beautiful now seems absurd."

These two quotes refer directly to the wild experimentation with typography that occurs and the beauty that this can display. I guess it's much the same as fine art, in that experimentation leads to the most creatively sound pieces of work. Thus type is like art, and indeed is art.

"The best type exists merely to communicate the idea"

"Does it add something of beauty to the world?"

- both by Beatrice Warde

He uses the example of Ikea changing from the well respected futura to the ubiquitous Verdana to demonstrate the intense craft of typefaces and the outcry when the art of a typeface (still a very readable serif) is substituted for something a little more bland, even if they do exactly the same job equally as well:

"In August 2009, people began talking about their love of one typeface and distrust of another"

"Futura has a quirkiness to it that Verdana does not"

"Verdana is linked to something modern and commonly reviled: Microsoft"

I think the debate it's self is like one you'd have when looking at the turner prize winner... you just can't believe that the art has been taken out of something. Verdana to me is like shed boat shed. It isn't art. Futura would be like Munch's scream; something compelling and unique.

Quotes on type as art

Here are some useful quotes for my book on why type is an art form:

In his book, Using Type Right, author Philip Brady writes "Designing with type means controlling all the visual signals so how a typeset piece looks reinforces what it says." The typeface chosen; the size of type; placement on the page; letter, word, line and paragraph spacing; white space; type and page color; alignment — everything — help to create the visual effect and get your message to the reader.

When an illustrator or photographer puts a great image on a page, it's often the first thing we notice. But when a typographer sets beautiful, perfect type, we may never notice it. In fact, if you find yourself noticing the type instead of the message, that is bad typesetting. I've seen lots of examples of this, where the use of type is so creative that the message becomes secondary or there is no message. If the goal is fun and beautiful art, and if we're going to frame and hang it on the wall, then fine. That's the end of the discussion.

But, type is meant to be read. And usually, our goal is to use type to assist communication. Grammar plays a part in this, along with the type. The two should work together to make reading easy, even pleasurable. The best use of grammar is to clarifymeaning in the message. The best use of type is to create a mood and support or enhance the message while maintaining legibility (easy recognition of words).

I think what is important about this quote is the fact that Typography isn't appreciated as an art because when it's done at it's best as a functional piece of work, the article writer is right, it shouldn't be noticed. But the quote she references seems to make the point that the typeface chosen can have complete control over how another human being percieves it. For this reason it is an art in the sense of a skill. It is a finely honed craft in terms of trying to communicate something very specific to someone. The art is when it communicates exactly what the designer wants it to to a large audience.

http://speckyboy.com/2010/08/26/typography-as-art/

This article makes a similar point about the functionality and selection of type as art, but also points out the way typography is used in 'fine art' especially since the pp art movement, where design and art's boundaries became a little more blurred. Here are some good examples they give. I think it's important that typography has become an immediate and important way to communicate in 'fine art' making essentially the type an art in it's self.

Examples:

Stefan Buggemann

Barbara Kruger:

http://www.techmic.com/magazine/issue-1/typography-is-important

"Today we are inundated with such an immense flood of printed matter that the value of individual work has depreciated, for our harassed contemporaries simply cannot take everything that is printed today. It is the typographer’s task to divide up and organize and interpret this mass of printed matter in such a way that the reader will have a good chance of finding what is of interest to him.”- Emil Ruder (typographer)

Again, this quote argues really, that typography is the art of communication, the way language is taken beyond it's essence as simple letters and can communicate a whole range of things. A serif can communicate that the work is traditional or formal, a sans-serif can communicate that the content is forward thinking, current or (at the minute, trendy) although it's not as simple as this and each typeface can do different things, this is a simple explanation of what I mean.

"Typography is an art, Good typography IS art" Paul Rand

http://www.cruzine.com/2011/03/31/typography/

Pavol Janovicek

"Typography was initially developed to better serve the purpose of improving the visual perception of a printed text and thus delivering textual content to the readers more effectively. The art component has always been present in typography, especially at the dawn of its development. Take a look at any ancient book and you’ll see how artfully every glyph was drawn and how richly the text was decorated. Later with the development of mass printing, font designers concentrated more on the practical characteristics of a text rather than on its artistic values. However, today, with the rapid and active development of digital typography and its popularization among visual designers, typeface creators are again ready to fascinate and impress us with the font designs, which clearly belong to art."

"we should not separate typography from art in general, because typography possesses all the characteristics of art. On one hand, typography is a technology of developing typefaces with its certain rules, notions, and industry standards. On the other hand, typography is pure art and a particular font or a font-focused illustration is a result of an artist’s imagination, creativity, and aesthetic feel"

"Typography has many artworks to offer, where color, shape of letters, and backgrounds are combined to produce a certain emotional effect on a viewer."

This is a nice series of quotes that say alot about what I'm trying to get across pretty well.

Definition of Art

I quickly looked up a few definitions of art, I might use this at the beginning of my book to contextualise everything else.

ART
noun /ärt/ 
arts, plural

The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power
- the art of the Renaissance
- great art is concerned with moral imperfections
- she studied art in Paris

Works produced by such skill and imagination
- his collection of modern art
- an exhibition of Mexican art
- an art critic

Creative activity resulting in the production of paintings, drawings, or sculpture
- she's good at art

The various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance
- the visual arts
- the art of photography

Subjects of study primarily concerned with the processes and products of human creativity and social life, such as languages, literature, and history (as contrasted with scientific or technical subjects)
- the belief that the arts and sciences were incompatible
- the Faculty of Arts

A skill at doing a specified thing, typically one acquired through practice
- the art of conversation

My argument would be fulfilled by the first definition and the last two, for sure and so I will probably put all of these definitions in my context book but make sure those definitions are more prominent in the hierarchy than the others are.

Cover designs, context book

Ok, s I thought it was about time I got the ball rolling on this, so this is some stuff I did over the weekend. I figured starting to dsign the thing would make it quite apparent where the gaps are in my context.

Here are some covers, they are based around the principal of 10 that I stated in the last post. I started with something quite complex and stripped it right down. I want this to be minimal and almost industrial in its precise focus. After a while I started utilising the copyright copytye idea of using rectangular blocks to simulate type in the letterpress blocks. I think this is the most effective, but I will get some feedback, because I also like the really stripped down designs too.

Open publication - Free publishing

Context further thought

If my context book(s) are used to argue that typography is an art form, then there should be a chapter (or small book) that properly reasons this before jumping into why I (and others) think that typefaces are an art form.

In this book I would need to firstly define art, before extracting quotes from type designers that establish their views on typefaces as art forms. I think for the sake of having rules I want to have 10 arguments to this effects,. This will tie in with 10 serifs, 10 sans serifs, 10 designers and make a really strong concept.

If this were to be the case, then the books would be roughly 24 pages each. This means to save on paper and costing, that want to do them less than A4 so I can print them comfortably on A4 sheets.

I kind of want them to be intellectual almost, so the standard academic book size of 127mm by 180mm seems appropriate.

Clarifying my context book, etc.

OK, so this is the time I really want to focus my context book and clarify a few things. After my tutorial with Lorenzo, where I was ill and unable to concentrate properly, I think I need to be really clear on the direction for my context book!

Firstly, the copyright copytype brief has been pushed to the side and I have some incredibly good first hand research for it which seems a shame. However I am going to incorporate this into the context brief. I am going to take the angle 'type is an art form' for my context book which means looking at the arguments as to why type is an art form or should be treated as such, touching upon copyright legislation and some of the quotes I have. Followed by 20 typefaces I love and why, including; who they were designed by, a quote form that designer on the typeface/a really pertinent quote from someone else, a large detail picture/glyph that shows off the bets characteristics of the typeface, it's uses and fonts within the family.

I will then have case studies from places like Raw, 194 and Music that showcase great type talent and their views on typography. I will also include some work from some of the great studios I have been looking at.

This allows me to bring together some good research I've already been doing and established the gaps I still need to research into!

Visiting Raw tomorrow/One Nine Four next week

I'm visiting Raw tomorrow and Studio One Nine Four next week as part of my contextual research, so in the name of preparation here are some questions I should ask them:

What is your philosophy/approach to design?

How did your studio begin and evolve?

How did you first start getting clients?/ What was your first lucky break into the industry?

What are the greatest influences on the visual language you use?

Who are your design heroes?

Hopefully these are enough to generate some conversation and I don't get all awkward and clammy.

I found this article on typography relevant to what I'm looking at in terms of context at the minute:

http://artequalswork.com/posts/abused-typefaces.php

Some typefaces aren’t bad: they’re just poorly applied. Some are so useful, they become ubiquitous, and others are just completely devoid of purpose. I like to think of typefaces more as tools of communication, with specifically designed purposes, rather than objects of art. By regarding typography as a tool, you can focus more on the intended function of a particular typeface, allowing for a more appropriate application, and generally, a more successful communication. Here are some of the most ubiquitous typefaces used in design these days, and how each is used, abused, or can be properly avoided.

Times New Roman: The Underdog

Times New Roman could easily be considered the most successful typeface of all time. Within a few years of being commissioned from Stanley Morison (with Victor Lardent) for The Times newspaper in 1931, TNR was the most widely used typeface in the newspaper industry, seeding its massive popularity 60 years before it was ever packaged with Microsoft products. One of the safest bets in the world of design these days, though, is that in any “properly” considered piece (except newspapers), the type setting will not be in Times New Roman. The mindset persists, with designers, that if TNR is a default typeface (as it is in the majority of software), any designer worthy of firing up an Adobe product should be able to explore options beyond the default. Is popularity, though, really a sound reason to banish a typeface from our type libraries?

TNR has enjoyed such a wide application for a reason. It not only revolutionized the newspaper industry at its birth, but it has survived on the merits of its design to out-live its original medium, and extend its typographic legacy long in to our digital times. Default or not, Times New Roman continues to be used in fresh and interesting new ways, and serves as a consistently solid serif choice in both print and web-design.

Suggested Usage:

For further examples of Times New Roman’s continued relevance, check out this article by David Shea, and take a look at how Coudal Partners have successfully utilized TNR for their site.

Helvetica: Mr. Popularity

If we’re still betting on typography, the second safest bet in design today is that in any given design piece, Helvetica has been used somehow. Helvetica has been, and continues to be an immensely popular typeface. Heck, like any good celebrity, it’s even had a movie made of its life. First drawn in 1956 by Max Miedinger, and based on Akzidenz Grotesque, Helvetica’s forms “evoke uncultivated strength, force and persistence”, as Robert Bringhurst has described it in The Elements of Typographic Style. Given these attributes, it is no wonder why designers have applied Helvetica to everything from subway signage, to toothpaste ads, to web pages.

But are all of these applications appropriate? Mr. Bringhurst goes on to say that even the lighter weights of Helvetica, issued in more recent years, “have done much to reduce its coarseness, but little to increase its readability.” The fact is, Helvetica, and its recent incarnation Helvetica Neue, are primarily successful as display typefaces, used best in headers and signage, not body copy. Therefore, Helvetica, as a tool for any typographer, is seriously limited.

Suggested Usage:

Helvetica’s not-too-distant cousin, Arial, is actually much more adept in the areas that Helvetica is weak, since Arial was designed for better readability at small sizes and on the screen. Like Times New Roman, Arial is also an unfortunately overlooked typeface, and many designers ridicule its homeliness, while negating its usefulness as a body copy workhorse. But by combining Helvetica and Arial, and utilizing each for their specific strengths, both can work in tandem to achieve a typographical success.

Copperplate: The New Black

Banks, steakhouses, law firms, and auto-repair shops… Copperplate has been used for all sorts of purposes, and has fastly become the de facto typeface for any piece that requires an air of establishment. Designed by the enormously successful typographer Frederic Goudy in 1901, Copperplate Gothic was intended to be set at small sizes on letterhead and business cards. Today, Copperplate has become the typeface of the modern suburb, assuring consumers that businesses of every sort are worthy of their money.

Copperplate’s sharp serifs work well to aid its readability at smaller sizes, but also seem to be misunderstood as giving the characters an old-world, stable ambience. The main distinctive feature of Copperplate is exactly why it has become so attractive to designers, and is exactly why it fails as adisplay typeface. The pointy serifs, at larger sizes, create distracting hot points at the ends of the letter-forms, severing the relationships between each letter, and forcing each character to be read individually. This destroys readability, and when Copperplate is overused, the effect can become quite nauseating.

Suggested Usage:

Keep it small.

Serpentine: Why?

I see the growing popularity of Serpentine as heralding the eventual descent of the Western world in to utterly encompassing idiocy. In fact, I cannot view any piece utilizing Serpentine without thinking of Mike Judge’sIdiocracy. Unleashed in 1972 by Dick Jensen for the Visual Graphics Corporation, Serpentine has a few weights, but only one speed: maximum warp. But even with its overly emphasized, horribly distorted letter-forms, Serpentine has its place. And for the love of all that we hold sacred as designers: keep it there.

What kind of a prison should we keep this beast in? One contained within the four walls of NASCAR, Professional Wrestling, strip clubs, and all-night discos. Anything including and related to these establishments have full reign to use Serpentine. Everything else must please find some other way of trying to convey speed, power, aggression, or machismo, unless you wish to do so in the cheapest fashion possible.

Suggested Usage:

Other type families to consider, besides this plague: Akzidenz Grotesque, Univers, Eurostile, or anything else bold and italic.

I suppose what it's saying is, that typefaces that I may value less are actually significant and have unfortunately been sullied. This isn't their fault and I sholdn't let it taint my perception of them, but perhaps look for the beauty and art in these typefaces.

emailing type foundries

OK, So I've emailed the following type foundries:

-Typotheque

-K-Type

-The Northern Block

-moretype

-Hype For Type

-A2 Type

And I asked them the following questions:

Firstly, as you see it, do you feel well protected by the copyright law concerning typefaces?

What do you see as the main flaws of the way the law works to protect you as a designer?

Why do you feel so many people are willing to appropriate typefaces without the artist/designer's permission?

How do you feel would be the best way to resolve this ongoing problem? Does it come from a change in legislation, or an attempt to change people's attitudes...?

Hopefully this will give me a lot of good source material to really assess the problem and what graphical solution I can create for it.