Sean, take a stroll over to Font Bureau alot of their fonts are designed for long publications like magazines and newspapers.

Don’t really knowing what your going for, but:

Look at Storm’s Sebastian for the sans. I’ve just started using it. Not foolproof, but very nice.

It can be paired with his Serapion if you have the nerve, or a more staid choice like a Garamond or Caslon.

Fedra Sans/Serif

Stone Sans/Serif

Seria and Quadraat would be at the top of my list. But really, why bother with sans? If I were a designer I’d make a career of never using sans.

> If I were a designer I’d make a career of never using sans.

Why would you limit yourself like that?

First questions:
1) What is the magazine about?
2) What is the reader demographic?
3) What’s the proportion of photo/illustration versus text.
4) How long is a typical article?

hhp

Before I will also put my set of Le Monde Sans, Le Monde Sans, Le Monde Courrier, Le Monde Livre, Le Monde Livre Classic, I think, rather than listing all Sans/Serif of the world with all good and bad reasons,

answer to Hrant questions!

apex sans http://www.thirstype.com/font_apexsans.html
apex serif http://www.thirstype.com/




rock n’ roll

The Thirstype site says Apex Serif was due to ship in early September. Any idea on the true release date?

1) What is the magazine about?
It’s a hobby/game magazine

2) What is the reader demographic?
16-30, mostly male, educated, well-read

3) What’s the proportion of photo/illustration versus text.
I’d say 60/40 or 65/35 text/illustration

4) How long is a typical article?
About 10 pages or so. A few articles are two-page spreads.

What DTP app are you using for layout?

Assuming that the license permits (or with special permission) you could get the style links and menu names for FF Thesis modified to fix the problems you cite in using the family.

Within the Adobe library, I’d think of maybe Myriad (sans) with either Warnock or Chaparral (serif).

T

Considering the target is proficient readers and the articles are pretty long, I’d choose a somewhat bookish face: something with a smaller than usual (for a magazine) x-height and good craftsmanship.

Aesthetically, I would go with something somewhat darkish, angular/rigid and a touch mannered. Warnock is seeming good overall for the body face — and it’s certainly complete. And maybe FB Amplitude for the titling — or maybe something by Storm.

hhp

Sean, I wouldn’t take suggestions for matching your sans and serif faces. As an art director with any sense of style, that’s probably the key creative decision you will make, as the relationship defines the personality of the magazine. You should determine it yourself, based on the way you will use the faces together. And the more unusual and personal a pairing you can make, the more distinctive the personality of your magazine.

Thank you Nick!

So the opinions of others don’t matter? Or is it that only “club members” have valid opinions…

Nick, making one’s own decisions is crucially important, but so is taking advice. Certainly there aren’t many Art Directors among us, so Sean should be especially cautious of taking things we say at face value, but people who spend a lot of time with fonts can certainly give decent insights. Nobody is born omniscient (in fact nobody ever becomes it either), it’s a matter of constant education, of listening with an open mind.

Choosing fonts is a lot more than just personal expression — there are cultural messages involved, not to mention readability.

hhp

Hrant, there is some advice that’s appropriate here, such as to be wary of using mega-families that have both sans and serif fonts (a convenience for the foundry, but a recipe for blandness).

However, on the principle of “show don’t tell,” I would never ask for other people’s suggestions as to what fonts to use, I would spend some time at the magazine rack, with specimen books, or experimenting.

Listening has its place, but when it comes to creative typography, looking and doing is the way to go.

How about Storm’s Tyfa for the serif?

http://www.stormtype.com/tyfa.html

>Hrant, there is some advice that’s appropriate here,
>such as to be wary of using mega-families that have
>both sans and serif fonts (a convenience for the
>foundry, but a recipe for blandness).

Nick, I respect what you’re saying, but surely you can’t think that all designers who tackle creating a matching set of fonts have designed in blandness?

The reason that I turned to the folks here is that the knowlege of what exists and is available is enormous. People have favorites (I know I’m quite fond of using 20th Century from Monotype), but I was hoping (and recieved) for a few new faces to search out and try.

So, after a bit of trial and error, I decided to go with Scala and Scala Sans, using the Shire Types for article titles and folios, and Dispatch and Stainless for subheads. The magazine is split between Lord of the Rings type articles and general news, so I wanted the humanist but slick design of Scala Sans for the general news, but the humanist serif of Scala for the LotR style stuff.

But, this brings up another point, what is your favorite “strange” mix of fonts? Mine was using Rotis Semi-Serif and Agency. It worked quite well, I even used Rotis Serif Italic for all the italic (Semi-Serif doesn’t have proper italic).

>but surely you can’t think that all designers who tackle creating a matching set of fonts have designed in blandness?

No, some make a point of constructing the sans and serif quite differently, eg Fedra. However, there are also quite a few where the serif is just the sans with serifs pasted on. Also, if the point of having sans and serif is to provide contrast in a layout, using a mega family that provides both reduces that effect.

Having said that, I once designed a publication using Gill Sans and Gill Serif (aka Perpetua), and it worked out nicely: Perpetua Titling and the condensed Sans were very useful, and the over-the-top Gill Sans Ultra Bold, surrounded by total Gillosity, wasn’t too bizarre at all.

BTW, who did design Gill Sans Ultra Bold, surely not Eric…?

>what is your favorite “strange” mix of fonts?

I used Meta for Heads and sidebars, and Paradigm for main text, when I redesigned Cycle Canada in 1996. It’s a motorcycle mag, so to accomodate the vibe of both hyper modern Japanese rocket bikes and retro-styled US hogs, I figured that would be OK.

> who did design Gill Sans Ultra Bold

It was indeed Gill himself. The “Kayo” weight was commissioned for the advertising field.
Upon finishing it, he called it “an ugly type for an ugly profession”. Gill was da man.

hhp

So, he held his nose, turned the trick, and dissed the john.
Or was that just to keep his cred?
Because it sure looks like he had fun being a ho.

I vaguely remember that it was in an Allan Haley book — not sure.

(Get well soon!)

hhp

Tiff —

There’s a something to that effect in Twentieth Century Type Designers. Page 78: “He even made drawings and annotated trial proofs of some of the more outlandish variants of the Sans family, including the Kayo, or Ultra Bold, which he nicknamed Gill Sans Double-Elefans. He was a professional; and he also had a way of constructing elaborate arguments in favour of an expedient solution. Thus he convinced himself that if the trade demanded types for such ugly purposes as advertising, it ought to have ugly types.”

I’ve also heard the sentiment phrased exactly as Hrant put it, but I can’t put my finger on it in print.

Hope you feel better soon. (My wife has come down with a sudden, nasty virus and I’m hoping not to catch it; at least not until after I’ve met my deadlines.)

— K.

I really shouldn’t be here. I’m sick as a dog, but I can’t resist a Gill question. But, as my head is fogged I can’t guarantee my answer. »> That said, Gill didn’t draw the heavier/iest weights of Gill Sans, the monotype office did. He referred to it as “elephans” as it looked like an elephant to him. Gill simply gave his “ok”, if you can call it that, as he hated it.

Hrant, where’d you get your info, I’d be interested in it.

Years later, but for the record, another voice on the question of Gill's involvement in Gill Sans Ultra Bold: Albert Sperisen defended Gill from the criticism in Robert Harling's Letter Forms and Type Designs of Eric Gill like this:

… Again, without proper checking, Harling gets a bit rough when he speaks of Gill’s “peccadilloes” in his “horrendous and blackguardly… display exploitations” of Gill Sans, the fat version known as Gill Sans Ultra Bold. The less said about this unfortunate version the better, but the fact remains that this “adaptation” was made by an apprentice under Gill’s supervision, a practice for all things made in the Gill workshop. (The source for this latter statement is a recent interview with one of Gill’s apprentices.) Gill accepted this commission from the Monotype works under duress. He put off doing anything about it for too long, until repeated demands produced what Gill labeled Sans-Elefans, a tongue-in-cheek title for a publicity letter in which Gill had no interest. This crass commercialism on the part of Monotype was no different from that of other type foundries when they “created” from overly popular typefaces, and almost all of those variations were the product of foundry “art departments.” Too, if the criticism of Gill is valid, it must be remembered that Stanley Morison was in charge at Monotype!

I think Gill Sans is too "heavy" (typographic colour), even in the "regular" weight, for running body text. But that's just my humble opinion. I'm trying myself to match a sans serif with other sans serif for a magazine...which typefaces match (for titles) with Scala Sans for running text?

Gill Sans is a nice and elegant typeface, but I don't like its "typographic colour" for running text...

The Pro version has a Book weight, between the old Light and Regular, and that Regular has been renamed Medium, which is what it now is (aka Semibold), in relation to most other sans faces these days.