Good question. I myself don't hear it too often (fortunately), although recently on SpeakUp (which I rarely frequent, only because I have to draw the line somewhere :-) somebody was defending the use of Times because it "wasn't fussy". Which is pretty funny because Times is strongly self-conscious - in a way it's really a display face.

I don't think you'll get a consensus, just a vague feeling.

To me it means "detailed" in a self-conscious way. Minimalists like their bread dry, and they tend to confuse the power of expression with fussiness.

A more focused term might be "mannered", which is actually used in a sufficiently coherent way by a number of designers.

hhp

I guess 'fussy' can usually be understood as the opposite of 'clean' or 'simple'.
But I'm not sure.

I equate fussy with 'over-designed' or even 'unskillfully tweaked'. But it's usually in the details. I also think of a design that's focused on details but not the whole picture. For example, the type may all be nicely set, but all the typeset elements are competing because no clear decision was made as to what was and wasn't important.

Hmmm... I've heard Minion referred to as fussy -- I always considered it a pretty good text face. Realizing that "fussy" is probably somewhat subjective, it appears that "fancy" and "showy" could be interchanged. Are types like Bodoni and Fleischmann considered "fussy" or are they simply not good for long text? I suppose it would apply only to types that attempt to be suitable for longer reading.

> Are types like Bodoni and Fleischmann considered
> "fussy" or are they simply not good for long text?

I think Fleischmann (which is actually incredibly good for text) can be seen as "fussy", but Bodoni is pretty austere (at least the Roman). But again, Modernists tend to see fussiness where it's just Life instead.

hhp

Just for comparison's sake, Miriam-Webster has three related definitions:

1) Overly decorative

2) requiring or giving close attention to details

3) revealing a sometimes extreme concern for niceties

typophiles are fussy about type.

damn straight.

I did call Minion fussy on these boards. Then I got Minion Pro, and found it not fussy. I just now took the trouble to try to compare the letter forms large.

Minion Pro slightly thickens the serifs at the tips. I think that did it. To me the original was a little too calligraphic in its finish. Minion Pro is also very subtly refitted, but you can definitely notice the difference when you set text in both as I have - Minion Pro is more compact, and the color is better.

Fussy to me is decorative elements that don't harmonize with the overall design. In this case, I think it was the sharper serifs (same length) that were to me fussy. I first got on these boards to ask about Minion, and felt pretty happy later when I found out that Slimbach had corrected just what I had felt was wrong, but couldn't put my finger on.

I think that the Victorian period had a lot of fussy design, but this may be more true of the later Victorian periond - I don't know enough of the history.

I also said I find the serifs in Hoefer's Requium fussy - apparently I'm the very distinct minority.

I am not against ornament, but I think it is hard to bring off well. When it is brought off well it is breathtaking, a tour de force. Probably it is out of place in text type.

jeje... i always tought it was something like blurry.

Blurry-fussy;
Something like Tate Modern?
(It seems to have expanded to all branches of Tate;
Britain, Liverpool, St Ives (which btw had a lovely Barbara Hepworth exhibition recently))
Notice how the logo changes in, um, degrees of fussiness.

�

I think you're thinking of the word "fuzzy," Hector.

It seems that fussy type is precisely that -- it fusses too much. It demands attention when it should be quiet and allow itself to be read.

That Tate id is pretty cool. It's an interesting method for getting variety out of a program.

so Minion Pro is a preffered typeface to Minion?
I'll have to use it sometime.
The only example of a book I've seen set in Minion left a bad taste in my mouth. But I think it has more to do with layout then the face. I'm a student so I don't want to hold a prejudice against Minion, any body know of any good example of it's use....
thanks

Michael, I don't know whether you will call it 'good' but in this thread you'll see the critique of my own book layout, which is done in Minion Pro. There are a number of PDF's.

Bringhurst's Elements of typographic style is set in Minion IIRC.

Currently I'm reading Vilém Flusser's The shape of things which is also in Minion I believe.

It would be interesting to compare those books printed in Minion and Minion Pro, if anyone knows.

I have compared the outlines of

Minion Pro vs Minion minion pro vs minion.pdf (438.3 k)

thank you, I've often wondered (or have forgotten ) what typeface is used primarily in the Elements of Typographic style.
I'll have to play around, and compose some stuff in Minion some time...

Thanks for that graphic William. I've never actually compared the two - pretty interesting.

>interesting to compare those books printed in Minion and Minion Pro

When was Minion Pro released? I ask because the Flusser book I have was printed in 1999. Was that before or after?

[Well, based on the dot on the 'i', I think the Flusser is set in Minion Regular. Not Pro.]

According to the Adobe web site, Minion was released in 1990, and Minion Pro in 2000. In between, I believe, a multiple master version was sold. What I find most interesting about this is that in the ten years, evidently Slimbach concluded - probably from feedback or experience with other faces - that digital text type should be slightly darker than he had originally thought was appropriate.

hmmm. Back to more fussiness. I'm reading a book set in Galliard right now. I hope the gods of type won't strike me down if I say that I can't stand the italics. When I'm reading anyway. I find them fussy, too mannered, and disturbing. Too dark also.

i love galliard's italics! but maybe that's because the bible i read growing up was set in galliard. (i especially love the little loops on the lc w and v)