It's official:
http://tdc.org/tdc/tdc2-2009-winners
Congrats to all the winners, and especially warm regards to my fellow classmates: Dan Reynolds and Mathieu Regeur!
It's official:
http://tdc.org/tdc/tdc2-2009-winners
Congrats to all the winners, and especially warm regards to my fellow classmates: Dan Reynolds and Mathieu Regeur!
Congratulations!
Re Klimax: That’s what I’ve thought, too. Typotheque says it is by Ondrej Jób.
I wonder what came first, Optica or Dioptical.
OK, the sample I sent in is posted, as are Kris' 2. Dan, I still have to wrangle kerning and features, but yes, it will be available soon.
I think we could say any of the winners are present or potential Typophile members. Hasn't Mark Jamra posted here?
My sister said Klimax "gave me a suffocating inexplicable nightmare feeling".... Ha Ha! I like it a lot. There is something blacker than ultra!
Definitely lots of congratulations to go around.
Kris Sowersby is quickly becoming one of my favorite type designers.
I'd like to see more of Cassius--I found a type sample on the web, but I was confused about its status at the time. I saw Greek characters somewhere in the specimen, but they weren't listed as supported elsewhere.
It's great to see so much wonderful work.
Congratulations to all the winning entries, first of all.
Cassius was designed to support Arabic as well. You can find a specimen here: http://www.typefacedesign.org/2008/ Glad to see it recognized.
I knew Klimax was something special when I first saw it on the crit boards. That type sample is so much fun to look at.
> I wonder what came first, Optica or Dioptical.
http://typophile.com/node/27833
http://www.gestalten.com/fonts/detail/?id=be0db8100c98034e010ca9ae0f240004
hhp
There may be some truth to farquart's assertion. FF Netto, for example, has seen great commercial success, but wasn't selected by the jury (along with other FontFonts).
On the other hand, I do see practical value in many of the winners — especially Alda, Novel, and Malabar. And as further evidence against the theory, Sowersby's two winners were both commissioned designs, so there was a obviously a group of graphic designers who demanded each of those typefaces.
it strikes me that the winners of the competition are types that have very strong personalities... i would think most graphic designers are drawn to more neutral looking designs... allowing the designer to put their personality on the work rather than fight with a type with such strong personality... the fact that mr sowersby's designs were commissions and the most neutral looking of the winners may bear this out... also mr paul's beautiful script faces have won a few times, they are very beautiful, but how many graphic designers actually use script fonts in their work? maybe a few times in their career... i know that veer's and most other on-line resellers point to scripts as their most popular sellers, but the question has to be asked... who is licensing these designs, and how come they turn up so rarely in general commercial work... are they more objects than tools?
> most graphic designers are drawn to more neutral looking designs
Really? Maybe 40 years ago.
> how many graphic designers actually use script fonts in their work?
?
Script fonts are always best-sellers.
The hardest thing to sell (at least retail) is a serious serif.
> who is licensing these designs
You think it's people who buy the font, install it and just look at pangrams?
(Wow, I wish people bought fonts for that!)
hhp
It seems as if there are three things people are talking about, combining two if they want to bolster their argument. Specifically, 1) design recognition, 2) use by graphic designers, and 3) commercial success. Farquart complains that 1 and 2 don't correlate, and Stewf chimes in that plenty of 3s that were not 1s.
I wonder how much graphic designers go for something "timeless" in their designs, which might involve using (as farquart notes) something with a more neutral personality. Witness the continuing usage of Helvetica.
On the other hand, commercial success for a font publisher often involves convincing graphic designers that last year's typeface is now passe and needs to be replaced with the hottest, latest typeface. "You don't want to use Fnorkle Script for Shazbat, Inc., because Blah Industries used it in their ad campaign last year." Nevermind that both the Shazbat and Blah logos are Helvetica.
I'm not how sure how commercial success should be brought into type design competitions (this one, or others). The TDC2, for example, does not require that submitted designs already have been released. I guess that some winners might never get released… that is at least a theoretical possibility.
Moreover, since the contest is supposed to be blind, should judges really consider how successful a typeface may have already been? When you submit your PDFs to the contest, you don't include the designer's name, typeface name, or foundry name in the layout. So you couldn't well write "Dear judge, this typeface has already sold xxx copies! Love, foundry y."
Now, I guess that individual judges could look at a design, and try to guess how successful a design might be. But that is a slightly different question. Also, I suspect that "success" is defined differently at each foundry. I also think that each foundry has—to an extent—its own unique customer base. The customers that really like a certain kind of typeface may always drift to foundry A, while foundry B gets customers who like their popular typefaces a bit better.
Like Stephen Coles, I've been involved with submitting designs from a foundry to this competition for five years now. I also can think of several designs I think were submitted to the contest this year that did not win, and of course I wish that they would have. But I am sure that this year's judges had good reasoning for their choices. I am honored to be on the list of those designers whose typefaces were selected for recognition. When we all read the published TDC annual that comes out later in the year, we can read what the judges had to think about this year's entries and this year's competition.
A large number of MyFonts bestsellers are also script fonts. Among Adobe's fonts, new releases of the past decade which were script fonts were more likely to sell really well than other new releases. I don't think I'd say "script fonts are always best-sellers," but they are more likely to be, it seems.
Cheers,
T
Hrant do you really think that a preference for neutral type went out of style 40 years ago? How do you explain the continued popularity of Trade/News/Franklin Gothic? Why would Font Bureau work so hard at releasing a new Franklin or Benton Sans if there wasn't a desire by GD's for neutral looking fonts.
Didn't Jeremy Tankard's "Blue Island" win a few years ago. Has anyone ever used Blue Island in a commercial project?
I think Farquart may be on to something here.
Captured from web.archive.org on 14 Apr 2018. view this capture