Damn! 2 snaps up in a circle!

Props to Computer Arts Projects for doing such a comprehensive typography special issue.

I have to agree that the Type of Our Times was a bit wack, but it wasn't the Helvetica details that bothered me, but the Modernist perspective. The history of type culture is not Bauhaus, Dada, Constructivists, etc. But this fault is widespread in design history, exemplified in Phillip Meggs History.

For an English perspective, it's like you're travelling through vast pre-war suburban estates of mock-Tudor semi-detached homes, to get to a 1930s international style mansion at the end of a lane.

The same article is featured in "Computer Arts Projects" #086 which also have another good article about Erik himself!. The wholw magazine is about typography, so it is not to be missed by most of the people around here. I myself was asked to make a tutorial... how to create a classic typeface.

I think the general problem with being misquoted etc, is because of the tight deadlines. They don't have the time or staff to read through the the copy enough before printing.

But what about getting a staff member to fix it already?

hhp

>But what about getting a staff member to fix it already?

I ping'd the chap I dealt with over there, with a link to this thread.

Cheers, Si

A little off topic, admittedly (for which I apologize):
Computer Arts do seem to trip themselves up a bit sometimes. The "Summer 2006" issue (#126) had a nice marquetry effect cover design (teamed with a Photoshop tutorial inside), but touted it as "woodcut effects"... er, no. Oddly, the same month's issue of Creative Review does actually have a woodcut on the cover.

________________________________________________________
Ever since I chose to block pop-ups, my toaster's stopped working.

"I think that once the onscreen resolution problem has been licked, type will be free of most restrictions, and most existing fonts will operate well in most situations. No special consideration will then need to be given to bitmaps for small sizes."

How quaint.

Nick said:
I have to agree that the Type of Our Times was a bit wack, but it wasn’t the Helvetica details that bothered me, but the Modernist perspective. The history of type culture is not Bauhaus, Dada, Constructivists, etc. But this fault is widespread in design history, exemplified in Phillip Meggs History.

How is this Meggs fault? I'm curious.

Computer Arts has been doing an annual type issue, though the focus hasn't been quite this historical before. There isn't a really good reference for 20th century type history other than the Lawson so maybe they couldn't check the facts.

George
I felt bad because I had no shoes, until I met a man who had no Bodoni

One persistent problem is the stigma that formal publications seem to feel in consulting informal groupings of aficionados (mingled with experts like Erik) such as Typophile. Instead of tapping into the lightning-fast public expertise before the stuff hits the fan, they tend to pretend such resources don't exist, sometimes even seeing them as an enemy.

hhp

I think you're right - but whereas some writers fear the blogosphere (or whatever you want to call it) and would never consult with it, others seem to embrace it. In that particular CAP issue there's a tips section where the author tapped various typophile regulars for contributions.

As for the errors, there's really no excuse - searching the web is so easy a caveman could do it - so next time do a little research ;-)

Cheers, Si

> the author tapped various typophile regulars

But critically, not in public. So people can't have proof of where
the expertise is not coming from... The least they should do is get
a typophiler to write the thing in the first place.

hhp

True

Missed this:

> How quaint.

:-)
Certianly don't try the following with any automatic-from-outlines method:
http://www.themicrofoundry.com/manademo/

hhp

"...so easy a caveman could do it - so next time do a little research ;-)"

LOL!!! I'll have a little mango salza with that remark :-)

ChrisL

How is this Meggs fault? I’m curious.

His was the first comprehensive history of graphic design.
In focusing on the modernist thread, he reflected a general consensus, and also set the tone.

Lewis Blackwell's 20th Century Type is similar, but it's like two separate histories in one. On the one hand it shows a history of avant garde examples of modernist typography, but on the other, it dutifully shows the major type designs, many of which are historicist, as alphabetic specimens -- but few are shown in use.