In addition to the two Jenson revivals at MyFonts cited by William, I encouraged you to take a look at Adobe Jenson, which is, in my opinion, the best digital version.

Thanks so much. The Jenson fonts are beautiful. I may use it for text (I'm doing my own calligraphy for captions and direct quotes from Machiavelli's letters).
I'm wondering, though

http://www.hwcaslon.com/
But it's not Italian.

hhp

>take a look at Adobe Jenson
I didn't mean to neglect this - there is a link to Adobe Jenson at the site I linked above, and a search under 'Jenson' at Myfonts.com will find you others, also quite impressive. I don't know what will best serve your needs, but I now have Adobe Jenson, and find it awesome. The optical sizes and the outstanding italics will probably make it your choice. If you just include some large sizes as part of the design it will look 'antique' enough, I would think.

It's also an early 18th century font, as opposed to an early 16th century one. I am, however, enamored of the long esses and other idiosyncracies of this font. (referring to Caslon)

In the battle between historical accuracy and artistic concerns, who wins?

Today's history depends on the latter. As long as you don't explicitly make claims that defy history, you're OK.

It's like that time a Famous Typographic Author (presumably Bringhurst) complained that Carter's Manutius font (a derivative of Miller, a "Scotch" face) was a poor choice for setting UCLA's comprehensive Aldine bibliography. Gimme a break.

hhp

> Gimme a break.

Call me a geek. "GEEK." That said, I think if you know your audience is going to sense something isn't right, or know something isn't right, I side with the group that says the otherwise. Although, I would respectfully say so. I'm not one to insult anyone who is knowingly brilliant.

Tiffany, you're being so dimplomatic that I can't figure out what you mean! :-/

> audience is going to sense something isn't right

That particular audience would certainly realize the font wasn't Aldine. But there's more to good typography than clich

I was only stating a fact. And being honest. But, Hrant's probably right. Good typography does not necessarily = absolute appropriateness at all times.

It's like this...stick a gaggle of type geeks in a movie theater and ask them to watch a western. In said western the whole town has signs made from lubalin graph and trajan. Well, the director didn't think the type mattered that much. The movie is still great, but sheesh, wouldn't it have been that much more pleasant for the type geeks?

I would like geeks of all sorts to enjoy my book ...

> the director didn't think the type mattered that much

The difference is that Naiditch, Carter and Lange do care about type.

hhp

I was trying to be funny. I'm a type geek. You guys caught that didn't you?

Niaditch, Carter and Lange aren't the directors though. They are the type designers. Lubalin Graph and Trajan are great faces, just inappropriately used. But maybe the type (on the signs) doesn't matter for the movie because it is just icing.

In all seriousness, I'd like to give the impression to my readers that I had done everything possible to make the book as good as I could. Even if few people notice something as arcane as the century a particular typeface was in use, some will. Others may notice the research put into clothing, history, and philosophy. In aggregate, I agree with Tiffany, I think, in that people will notice that it's accurate.
I have taken some liberties, especially with Machiavelli's handwriting, which I have made more legible while trying my best to remain faithful to his script.

>

Seeing posters in "Gangs of New York" set in ITC Benguiat was a bit of a drag for me, I'll admit. But Ed got a real charge out of it.

Naiditch doesn't design type - he's the Curator of Medieval & Renaissance Manuscripts at UCLA Special Collections. He was the guy in charge of the project (along with Sue Kaplan). Lange does design type, but that wasn't his involvement in that project - he was the typographer. Along with Carter they arrived at the choice of Manutius because that's what their collective typographic expertise told them. They spent a small fortune on just the font. They didn't choose it because it came after Mandrill in their font menu.

--

That said, I think for Don's project a old Italian face would probably be best. But it doesn't have to be from the 1500s in Florence - that's too restrictive. It's more important that the font work, not sit pretty and keep exclaiming "Hey, look at me, I'm from the exact same time and place as the guy this book is about! How 'bout that huh, huh!!"

hhp

"But maybe the type (on the signs) doesn't matter for the movie because it is just icing."

Maybe. But I feel that if you have the choice between doing something right and just doing it good enough, you don't really have a choice.

"That said, I think for Don's project a old Italian face would probably be best. But it doesn't have to be from the 1500s in Florence - that's too restrictive. It's more important that the font work, not sit pretty and keep exclaiming "Hey, look at me, I'm from the exact same time and place as the guy this book is about! How 'bout that huh, huh!!""

I agree completely.

I was just making an analogy. Sheesh!

Tiffany, all I'm saying is, I hope the designer's role is more than just knowing history and making canned associations.

hhp

Perhaps setting the text all in italic with roman caps would give it quite the period look. The attached gif is from "Historia della GGGuerre Esterne de Rommani di Appiano printed 1550

It's more important that the font work, not sit pretty and keep exclaiming "Hey, look at me, I'm from the exact same time and place as the guy this book is about! How 'bout that huh, huh!!"

I agree with this, and more...
Remember that your book is also going to be something worthwhile in itself, and its from the 21st century. Now its as valid to argue that you should use a font from your own century as it is to argue that you should use a font from Machiavelli's
That way, in 300 hundred years time, people can look at your book, and say 'hey, this is how they used to make books about the 15th century, way back in the 21st century - how cool is that!'

BTW I'm not saying that I think that you MUST use a new font, just that its not necessarily the case that not using a 15th century Florentine font is in some way not doing it right.

I think Jenson is the dream typeface for this project - don't reject it because it is so logical to use it!.

Jenson doesn't just happen to be of the period. The original breathes of that same confidence and disipline and panache as the renaissance thinkers, including Machiavelli. It is not just a question of using something of the same period. It is another example of renaissance brilliance, matched to Machiavelli himself.

Now which Jenson best suits your project is a more difficult question. None of course capture exactly the spirit of the original. Actually the italic of Abobe Jenson might work as James suggests. And the Open type does have both the archic long 's' roman (that looks like and 'f') and italic (like the integral sign).

I would also look at Hightower and Italian Oldstyle at least.

You should consider ITC Legacy, with a Sans available:
http://www.itcfonts.com/fonts/detail.asp?nCo=AFMT&sku=ITC9070

Requiem by Jonathan Hoefler with very nice caps, borders and Italics.
http://www.typography.com/catalog/requiem/index.html

Iowan Oldstyle, another contemporary Jenson by Johnd Downer:
http://www.bitstream.com/categories/products/nfc/iowan_complete/iowan_complete.html

and last but not least, my Apolline with its ligatures and ornaments
http://www.typofonderie.com/Alphabets/Apolline.asp

I miss Manticore from John Hudson, not really available? and few others too.

Iowan's x-height is too big for book work. Some would even say it's too big for a Jenson!
Of those, I'd vote for Apolline or Manticore.

--

It would be nice if Sierra had a bookish version.
http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/linotype/sierra/

hhp

Naiditch ... Lange ... Along with Carter they arrived at the choice of Manutius because that's what their collective typographic expertise told them.

I believe a large factor in the choice of Miller-by-any-other-name (I've nothing against using Scotch romans in books about renaissance Italian printers, but naming the font 'Manutius' is a bit like designing a Bodoni revival and calling it 'Gutenberg') was the existence of a complimentary Greek design, Matthew's Wilson Greek, that worked well with the Latin text face. Since so many of the Aldine books were in Greek, having a nicely paired Greek and Latin for the bibliography was extremely important.

> .... Wilson Greek ....

Yes, a central point.

BTW, the project is well explained in an issue of APHA (but I forget which).

And I would agree that the name was confusing. But RB was essentially complaining about the design.

hhp

I won't bother to weigh in on the discussion about
whether to use an obvious 1500 typeface or not. But
if you do decide to go that route, and especially if you
want something with that rough faux-letterpress look,
then you should really consider Monotype Poliphilus,
since that's what it was designed for.

Poliphilus was a metal interpretation of the third roman
made for Aldus by Griffo and used in Hypnerotomachia
Poliphili, printed in Venice in 1499. You can't get much
more historically allusive than that. Monotype recreated
the Poliphilus in 1923, with all its bumps and warts, for
a facsimile publication of the Hypnerotomachia.

I'm surprised no one mentioned it sooner.

-- Kent.

Thanks so much for all of the informative posts!

I've got plenty of choices to mull over at this point, though I'm leaning in the direction of Adobe Jenson, perhaps in the style that James suggests. William's eloquence in praise of Jenson is also very persuasive.

Steve, one thing about using a modern typeface: due to the unique nature of the medium, in which type is superimposed or woven into the images, it would look somewhat jarring (IMO) for a modern typeface to be juxtaposed with images of Renaissance Florence. The comics medium is what demands of me an approach to text which complements my approach to imagery.

I refuse to use the common "comics" fonts in this piece, as those emerged as the type of choice for children's adventure comics, and are more appropriate for that genre. (That style of writing in comics has become ubiquitous as the superhero genre became so dominant that few questioned treating text in comics any other way--but that's another hobby horse and perhaps not germane to this forum)

If you're interested in what the hell I'm talking about, you can view the prologue to Machiavelli <a href="http://www.donmacdonald.com/Machiavelli/machframe.html">here</a>. I apologise in advance for the horrible calligraphy on page 2, which has descenders and ascenders crashing into one another. I was still stretching my legs...

Have a look at Adobe's Brioso Pro, and Poetica.

If you have the dough, you might look at dfType's Rialto . (Can someone give us a URL for them? i can't find one.)

But RB was essentially complaining about the design.

I discussed this briefly with Robert a few years ago, I don't recall him 'complaining': he just commented that it was an odd choice to use a Scotch roman for the bibliography of an Italian renaissance printer publisher. He's right, it is an odd choice, which is not to say that it is not readable, appropriate in other ways (harmonises with the Greek, handles the textual articulation well, etc.).

Well, I just checked that APHA article: you're right!

hhp

You can reach dfTYPE (Rialto) here

http://www.druckschriften.de/Druckschriften2/Typo-Top-100/Schriften/df-type/df-type.html


Since I was involved in the typographic consulting on The Aldine Press project here were the considerations. First, this is first and foremost a catalog of bibliographic descriptions. It is secondarily a book about Aldus. A typeface was needed, any typeface, that had a workable Greek, Latin, roman. By workable I mean we would need "on a discovery" basis, "every" G/L/r letterform that existed as incunabular (including those that no longer exist) as well as any G/L/r letterform that was currently of use in the twentieth century. Matthew was our only choice. Not only as a designer but as a knowledgable historian of type. At the time there was no italic for the Miller and that would have to be developed as well. "He" named the face Manutius in honor of the project and for no other reason. This particular configuration of the Miller/Wilson face no longer exists as it was developed solely for use in this project.

I've found that bibliographic descriptions, dictionaries, etc, go a bit beyond their subject matter and are bibliographically considered a subject in themselves. They are certainly categorized that way in every library system that I know of.

RB, as I recall from an email he sent to me, was a bit more emotional about this than he now claims. He also felt my use of Miller for a faux nineteenth-century book about Gutenberg was wrong as obviously anything about Gutenberg should be set in a blackletter. His latching on to subject matter prevented him from seeing the structure that existed beyond the subject matter, a nineteenth century interpretation, a bibliographic description catalog.

No incunabular or Renaissance form can adequately provide the legibility/readability needs that would be required in printed matter where such concerns are paramount. Early forms that existed before these historical concerns raised their ugly little heads are often inadequate. Every interpretation of these early forms runs into this problem.

Wow, the work posted on your site is impressive. Using the comic panels with a fine art approach and highbrow subject is really interesting. What market is there for this work? A fine art market?

Incidentally, if you decide on Adobe Jenson and you have a university/school connection, you can get it as part of their academic discount of Adobe Type Classics, a great deal.

Also, if you don't know about it already, you probably will enjoy Somerset Maugham's 'Then and Now', an historical novel with Machiavelli as the protagonist.

Gerald:
Thanks for the dfType link.

William,

Thanks for the kind words. I'm one step ahead of you: I work at Harvard Business School Publishing, the upside of which is that I just bought Adobe Type Classics for $80. It is an amazing deal.

It looks like my type decisions are going to work out as follows:
1) Handwritten script based on Machiavelli's handwriting for diary entries or letters. This is the treatment that I used in the prologue, when Machiavelli descibes the Pazzi conspiracy in a manuscript.
2) Adobe Jenson italic for excerpts from published works and captions that are not written by Machiavelli
3) A handwritten Jenson Italic for dialogue. I've chosen this approach because of the inappropriateness of traditional comic fonts for this project, and the fact that it will make for easier reading than a script.

As for the market, there is a small market for art/alternative comics: books like Maus, Jimmy Corrigan, From Hell, Safe Area Gorazde. This book is unlike those in execution, but similar in aims: to use comics as a medium to tell a complex story with a desire to be artistically innovative as well. (I hope that didn't sound too pretentious: basically, there are a number of people out there who believe in comics' potential as an art form that is capable of more than adolescent power fantasies.)

But it's not a great way to get rich. :-)

Oh, and thanks for the heads up on the Maugham book. I hadn't known about it. I just put in an order at Amazon. Ah, the Internet ...

> A handwritten Jenson Italic

I don't get what this means.

hhp

Hrant,

Sorry if my phrasing was unclear. I meant that I would be writing with a nib pen and india ink, using Jenson Italic as a model. I figure this will give the the dialogue the casualness of everyday speech while keeping with the Jenson motif. (using the typeface itself looks jarring coming out of characters' mouths and gives the impression that they are delivering formal speeches rather than simply talking.)

http://www.myfonts.com/person/jenson/nicolas/