
Classic Fonts That Will Last a Whole Design Career - dwwoelfel
http://www.blog.spoongraphics.co.uk/articles/25-classic-fonts-that-will-last-a-whole-design-career
======
tptacek
What a weak post. I'm going to spend a career alternating between Helvetica
and Akzidenz? Clarendon (really?) and Rockwell? Why? Why would a designer ever
use "Avant Garde"? What's the last major thing to ever use Optima?

Some of these faces seem terribly out of fashion (Optima, Rotis, Clarendon).
Some of them seem useful only if you're going to set printed books (Bembo,
Garamond). Some of them are so closely related (Akzidenz and Helvetica,
Univers Avenir and Frutiger) that it's hard to see why all of them are here.

But what really bugs me about this post is that it contains no content. Choose
whatever faces you want; you're supposedly the expert, blog writer! Just tell
us something about them when you do.

~~~
bonzoesc
> What's the last major thing to ever use Optima?

> Some of these faces seem terribly out of fashion (Optima, Rotis).

The 2008 McCain/Palin campaign used Optima.

~~~
mdg
How can you tell? Are you able to tell what a typeface is just by looking at
it? What characteristics help you decide ?

I have been trying to learn about typography, passively, for the past couple
months. Anything sans serif looks like Helvetica to me.

~~~
tptacek
Optima is a very famous typeface. It's probably the most famous humanist sans
--- these are faces that try to capture the quirks of handwriting or
calligraphy. The uppercase letters mimic carved-in-stone Roman letters.
Because it has serif-y features (flared terminals in particular) it's
notoriously hard to harmonize with other faces. Every designer in the world
can spot it on sight.

In general, look at the contrast in weights (where do the lines get thinner
and thicker) and the axis of those contrasts (is the "hand" drawing the letter
positioned at an angle?). In a Sans, you can also eyeball how "geometric" the
letters are; is the "o" a perfect circle, for instance?

Even if you're not a designer (I'm definitely not), it's worth it to buy a
copy of Bringhurst's _Elements of Typography_; it's a beautifully written and
designed little book.

~~~
mdg
Thanks for the heads up with that book... I was wondering if there was a K&R
for typography.

~~~
jinfiesto
Robert Bringhurst's book is fantastic, but if you're starting off, I recommend
James Fellici's "Manual of Typographic Style."

------
WilliamLP
I wonder if I'm the only one here who is completely font-blind? I never notice
what font something is unless someone points it out, let alone being able to
pick out 25 specific ones. I guess that makes me a poor candidate for being a
designer, doesn't it!

~~~
Chris_Newton
Alas, typography is cursed by two common afflications in the design community:

1\. Good typography does not draw attention to itself. Most people will only
notice your typographical work when you get it wrong. When you get it right,
the reader takes in the information and registers the mood without ever
noticing the medium.

2\. There are snobs, who will artificially exaggerate the differences between
fonts to try to appear more knowledgeable. There _are_ differences between
fonts and they really can create very different results. However, sometimes
there are two well-designed fonts that happen to be very similar, and you
really could use either with good, professional-looking results. Arguing about
which of these fonts is "better" invariably generates more heat than light.

In other words, if you're not a trained designer, you're supposed to be font-
blind. And if you _are_ a trained designer, your reader should be font-blind.
If they are noticing the details of which font you use, you're probably not
doing a very good job.

------
spacecadet
As a designer I'm tired of seeing this post(10th time now?) Which is always
directly "borrowed" from this book... [http://www.amazon.com/Essential-
Typefaces-Lifetime-Joshua-Be...](http://www.amazon.com/Essential-Typefaces-
Lifetime-Joshua-Berger/dp/1592532780)

Which I have owned for, god I dont even remember how long. Dont defend these
typefaces to deeply. They come with almost every computer today, so they are
accessible to almost everyone (maybe mircosoft decided to catch up?). Which is
why they are good for a lifetime.

Right now there are many contemporary type foundries putting out some really
beautiful typefaces. Like these guys. <http://processtypefoundry.com/>

Thats all. peace.

~~~
slashclee
I really love Mark Simonson's fonts. Anonymous Pro is a great fixed-width
font, and I really like Proxima Nova and Mostra Nuova. I'd much rather give
him my money than Adobe.

------
joshstaiger
I recommend Bringhurst's Elements of Typographical Style as a crash course in
typography.

[http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert-
Brin...](http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert-
Bringhurst/dp/0881791326)

It contains wonderful guidelines for typesetting and also gives a sense of
history and culture behind common fonts.

Also useful is this site that outlines how to apply Bringhurst's principles to
the web:

<http://webtypography.net/>

------
aw3c2
Content-void topX list with affliate links.

------
ExpertIdiot
There is no justification for any of these fonts. He could've simply spun the
wheel'o fonts and picked 25 of these. Most fonts have a real designer behind
them that designed the font for a reason. The font depicts a mood and should
be used for specific situations. This just makes it seem like you should pick
any font of your choosing and run wild with it.

Since there are 25 I surely can't run out right?

------
teye
How could you make a list like that and omit HFJ's Gotham in favor of FF Dax
or Myriad?

Many of these are roughly equivalent. Terrible list.

A few seconds of searching turns up an infinitely more interesting piece from
Smashing Magazine: [http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/03/20/60-brilliant-
type...](http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/03/20/60-brilliant-typefaces-
for-corporate-design/)

~~~
gabrielroth
Gotham has been used so much in the past couple years that I'd be very wary of
using it for anything. In ten years it'll immediately scream '2009'.

~~~
teye
It very well may. I point it out because it seems to be becoming a default,
just as Helvetica has.

------
mhd
I generally agree a lot with professional designers about typography (well,
apart from the rabid Helvetica lovers among them), but sometimes I wonder
whether compromising for the tastes of the general public wouldn't be worth it
in monetary terms. The proliferation of Comic Sans and Papyrus doesn't come
out of nowhere, and if you walk around in a random city in this world (with
Latin signage), you're bound to see lots of those signs. I have a friend who
works in a print shop, and apparently a lot of customers prefer to have that.

So depending on your desired projected image, you might want to go with the
typographically "bad" choice, for psychological reasons. I wonder whether real
designers regard this with the same distaste as I would about copy & paste
programming…

~~~
ugh
I don’t think Comic Sans and Papyrus are popular because people prefer them to
choices a designer would make. They are popular because they are readily
available. Normal people pick a font by looking at the font dropdown in Word.
You actually have to pay a lot of money for most fonts on the submission’s
list.

A lot of good could be done for this world by operating systems with better
default fonts.

~~~
mhd
Windows and Mac do have better fonts available, so that can't be the sole
reason. What both fonts have in common, is that they don't look professional.
So they are intended to convey a different mood by their user – which gets
somewhat ironic when you consider the amount of passive-agressive notes
written in Comic Sans.

Just like deliberate spelling mistakes (flickr, tumblr etc.) are used to
convey a certain non-chalance, using "bad" fonts might be used as a tool. It's
probably not good for long-standing branding, but for cheap one-off mass
market communication, it might fly. Personally, I probably wouldn't, but then
again, I'm one of those who considers sans-serif fonts necessary evils in this
low-DPI world, not much more.

~~~
notahacker
Comic Sans is often used quite deliberately to give an air of
unprofessionalism/cheapness. I suspect that Papyrus is more often used in a
misguided attempt to look arty or historic and would probably get
significantly less use with better default fonts.

~~~
stan_rogers
Well, Comic Sans is a poor excuse for a hand-lettered font, and there are a
zillion better out there, even if most lay people are unaware of them.
Papyrus, though, is a gorgeous font (a modified Carolingian with caps and a
distressed effect) that is _the_ righteous choice when used correctly. Like
anything that looks simple on the surface, though, people are going to copy
the wrong thing when they try to duplicate someone else's success. Papyrus can
figure strongly in a successful design, but it's rarely the font alone that
makes a design work.

~~~
ugh
Comic Sans would be an ok choice for comic lettering, you know, what its name
kind of implies.

~~~
jcl
Even then, it's limited to a kind of "cramped technical pen" lettering that
would be expected in alternative or underground comics. There are other comic
book fonts that would be more broadly applicable.

~~~
stan_rogers
Anime Ace is a particular favorite of mine for speech bubbles and narrative
blocks. Badaboom works well for in-panel sound effects. There are many others,
but those two remind me most of my Marvel childhood. (I has Spidey #1 _and_
Hulk #1. They cost a dime at the time, and who the hell knew they'd be worth
anything? Same with my Bobby Orr rookie cards -- I traded a bunch of them away
for proper Leaf players, and wound up putting the last one in the spokes of my
bike the next season.)

------
wccrawford
I've been trying to get into design more, but I apparently don't have any
innate talent and I'm going to have to actually work hard at it.

Anyone got any tips/articles/etc on how to pick a typeface?

Yeah, that's a pretty broad question... I've tried going by my feelings, and
that only goes so far with no innate ability. I can recognize some as looking
'classy' or 'fun', but anything more fine-tuned than that eludes me so far.

~~~
earnubs
"... I apparently don't have any innate talent and I'm going to have to
actually work hard at it."

Unfortunately even with innate talent you will still have to work hard at it.
There are many things to consider, from fitting in with the style and purpose
of the project (Mrs Eaves is pretty but would you use Mrs Eaves on a project
about the Titanic?) to practical issues like having the right weights for body
type.

~~~
nsfmc

      "even with innate talent you will still have to work hard at it."
    

Word. I responded to an earlier post that this sort of thing is a learned
skill. About a year or two ago, i started a font blog[1] so that i could learn
about typefaces and also so that i could become better at making type
specimens.

It worked, at least until i got busy with school, but it actually made me
understand type and it also had the effect of making me use typeface outside
of my comfort zone. I welcome submissions, so let me know if you want to take
a stab at writing up a typeface / specimen.

Just as with programming or, for that matter, anything, practice in seeing[2]
and using type is really the winning ticket. The more you do it, the better
you get. I know, lame, right? But how do you get better? You research, you
try, you fail, you get feedback, and you get better.

[1] <http://fontasm.tumblr.com> [2] Seeing Is Forgetting the Name of the Thing
One Sees (978-0520049208)

~~~
thristian
> <http://fontasm.tumblr.com>

Subscribed.

------
garrickvanburen
These are all fine faces with (mostly) very rigid licenses around them. If
your design career was online - the chances of you able to easily use any of
them in a meaningful way is nil. There are some great faces released under the
OFL, GPL, and CC licenses.

------
kadavy
Remember, most of these won't look so good as body copy on the web:
[http://www.kadavy.net/blog/posts/design-for-hackers-why-
you-...](http://www.kadavy.net/blog/posts/design-for-hackers-why-you-dont-use-
garamond-on-the-web/)

------
hsmyers
The complete lack of any mention of printer's ornaments (pi fonts) or
specialty fonts (chess anyone?) suggests that 'Career' doesn't even begin to
cover edge cases. Which of course leaves the land of hum-drum in the middle---
no thanks!

~~~
someone_here
No need for specialty fonts for chess since all chess pieces are in Unicode:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_symbols_in_Unicode>

~~~
wmf
I'm going to take a wild guess that not all fonts include all Unicode
characters.

------
sahillavingia
I could use one font in my whole design career, though it would be an awefully
short one if I did!

