But they did have a recent type-centric issue, and the content at least wasn't too bad (for a mainstream magazine).

hhp

hm, dunno. Are you referring to the kerning of "YP"? It looks off.

This is a screenshot from my portfolio. When "setting" these icons, I fussed over the kerning just as one would when setting type. Is this the type of non-font typography the HOW article refers to?

ok i should have explained- the article is about how the author of the article has noticed that "more and more designers are turning away from pre-fabricated fonts and toward handlettering, found objects, or other non-font solutions to fulfill their typographic needs." and yes the tracking throughout the magazine is off but im going for something else.

i mean kerning, not tracking

Everything about HOW magazine is 'off' and always has been. It's a joke of a magazine.

The problem I had with this article- the author of the article talks about how designers are more and more using "non-font" solutions. Isnt that what good designers do anyway? But what I've noticed is more and more designers turning to uncreative font solutions- like the person who designed this spread. You're designing a spread about not using fonts, AND THEN YOU GO AHEAD AND MAKE A BORING SPREAD USING A COUPLE ORDINARY FONTS THAT WERE NOT EVEN KERNED. damn this mag sucks. It reeks of amateur hell.

I don't have a problem with using type to communicate a story about not using type. It might be fairly literal to use handwriting/rubberstamps/chickenfeet/whatever, but that doesn't make it clever, or necessarily appropriate. Presumably there were illustrations which served to communicate the process of non-font design?

Hey, how else can you convey language? :-)
For a while -in the 60s, I think- people were giving all kinds of credit to icon-based communication. But then the illusion wore off, and people "resigned" to using actual sentences and words and stuff.

hhp