Yes, and it's all the fault of new technology driving up volume and driving down prices: first for printing, then later for typesetting.

Of course, the first "new technology" I am thinking of is the introduction of the steam-powered printing press, which took over around 1830-1860. Then it was automated typesetting with the Linotype and Monotype typecasters at the turn of the (19th to 20th) century. And so on.

It's quite funny to read old books and magazines, and see exactly the same kind of bemoaning of the decline of typography.

Of course, there is an element of truth to all this, but the point is that it's been a problem for over 150 years.

I actually believe that new tools and processes for automating higher-end typography are resulting in an increase in typographic quality right now. In the past this has happened as each technology has matured, and right now it seems to be happening with digital typesetting (at least at the high end).

Regards,

T

Lack of control? Two words: Comic Sans

>'evident erosion of typographic awareness knowledge and control' (John Macmillan, baseline issue 43).

Yes, there certainly is an erosion of typographic knowledge and quality. But before the changes that Thomas mentioned, almost everything printed was created by a relatively small, closed group of people. Now, more people make things, and they also make MORE things. But still, there are many people who do manage to make wonderful things, with good awareness.

Another interesting point with technology: when technology first comes on the scene, it decreases the level of overall quality. But then, technologies have always improved, and have begun to care more about things like typography.* Think about the first typesetting machines from the 1880s. Dreadful. But by the 1930s, English Monotype was making fabulous typefaces and very fine typography.

Much of the first digital typesetting was wretched, in part because of the low-resolution bitmap type. But then came PostScript, and desktop publishing software. Granted, every granny can make a bad flyer now, but you and I can also use InDesign to set well designed books ourselves.

>Do you agree that this is a worrying issue for the future of typography in the hands of new graduates?

No, I don't worry about the fate of typography at all! I see opportunity, and a challenge for me and all other young designers.


* OK, this might not be true in the case of Photo-typesetting�

Hi Danielle -- greetings from the other coast (Glasgow).

I think everybody would agree that the speed at which design technology has moved over the past 25 years or so has caused some problems. The entire design industry has changed, from top to bottom -- there is not really any such thing as a type-specifier or compositor in the mainstream of the industry anymore. These very specialised jobs are now left to the (probably -- like myself -- untrained) graphic designer, at best, or at worst the company secretary. Likewise the designer is generally expected to know a fair bit about prepress (find me a printer that will give you an honest answer about densities and dot gain and I'll move to your city). So, yes, a skill base has disappeared, and print/type production is going through an era of transition.

However, I wholeheartedly agree with Thomas, from the simple point of view that a new (digital) font from a respectable foundry today tends to be in many ways 'better' than what you could expect ten or fifteen years ago. 'Better' in the sense that more designers these days seem to want to create useful pieces of 'type engineering' which innovate whilst paying attention to the history of the craft (as opposed to all the spacey crap that came out in the 80s and 90s as people went crazy with the new technology).

Viz. Fontbureau with Prensa, Farnham, Amira, Amplitude etc., pretty much anything by Storm, Adobe's Opentype Pro fonts, Legato ...

Plus, as Thomas hints, we have tools like InDesign which actively encourage excellent use of type (whereas Quark, e.g., seems to have always gone out of its way to make typesetting even more abstruse).

I also think that the fact that we're here talking about this is evidence of A Good Thing happening. I'd guess that most of the people who read and post to this list are in fact not type designers but enthusiastic graphic designers who actually care about how they use type and about what type they use. This isn't new, but owing to the Internet it's becoming much more widespread. There isn't really an excuse now for a self-respecting designer to not know what they're doing vis a vis type.

The crux of this is going to be whether there are people in schools like DoJ who can and will teach good typographic practice to their students. I'd be interested to know what your experience is in this respect, Danielle.

R

Hi Robert, thanks for your feedback.

re. your inquiry as to 'whether there are people in schools like DoJ who can and will teach good typographic practice to their students' then that's a definite yes. Two of our tutors: David Herbert and Gary Gowens, are assessors on the board of ISTD and take part in the yearly student assessments. In the classroom they place strong importance on rigorous typographic control, setting us projects that concentrate entirely on these skills.

Where Gary is a great advocate of Why Not Associates, Dave is very much a stickler for the old school; Muller-Brockman et al. The grid is very important to them however they do allow room for those students who seek to break the grid in an informed way.

Talking to Dave on the same topic as this thread, he commented on the low pass rate of ISTD in recent years with 'approximately 70% of entries failing to meet the benchmark standards set by the society'. (He went on to stress that Duncan of Jordanstone achieved an 80% pass rate) He seemed to feel students are not evidencing enough typographic control or respect for 'the history and foundations of the subject'.

My friend doing Graphics at Glasgow school of art never seems to have any tuition in these areas, this shows up the imbalance of the priorities in design education today.

PS. Amy Conger, you will be pleased to know that I do not know a single graphic design student who would ever use Comic Sans! As for the rest of the country, well you cant have everything. (I have recently managed to wrestle the designing of the music society concert posters out of the hands of those determined to use bad clip art and Comic sans set in rainbow colours!)

Danielle

Danielle, that's good news about the tuition on your course. I'm aware a little of the graphic design department here in Glasgow and there really doesn't seem to be much rigour in their teaching of typographical matters. This pretty much squares with most of what I know about Glasgow vs DoJ: DoJ seems to put a lot of emphasis on good tuition and facilities, Glasgow relies on having a nice building and being in a cool city.

Incidentally, I'm a graduate of Glasgow School of Art. I studied Fine Art Photography and then did a Masters in Fine Art there.

R

> Amy Conger, you will be pleased to know that I do not know a single graphic design student who would ever use Comic Sans!

So why is the UK awash with the use of this typeface? Are you saying that upon graduation former students are given a license to use it?

Woah there! I just said I personally don't know a graphic design student who would use it, but then perhaps that reflects the good typography tuition on my particular course. I haven't noticed it used so prolificaly in graduate work tho, please show me examples of these sinners!
danielle

The world is awash in Comic Sans because it is on just about every computer, not because inexperienced designers love it. In short, everyone who isn't a "designer" seems to use it.

I think that once a community says "no, don't use that, it is bad" that such attitudes become dogma, and design dogma is usually bad. I personally don't like Comic Sans, and think that it is so abused, but I think that it would be kind of cool, as a "real designer" to tackle a poster design where the brief set out clearly that I could only use Comic Sans and Clip Art

Did you see the section in creative review where they did that? (september 2004 pg 61 entitled 'Why do you hate me'!) most of the posters abstracted it quite a bit tho so they kindof got round it.
I do find it interesting how most designers hate it and yet so many 'non-designers' seem to love it. just chatting to my flat mate for example who says she thinks it great and uses it all the time. CR comments on its usual use for 'the office xmas party invite' Thats a wierd paradox as its the public who we're designing for at the end of the day. hmm...

> I haven't noticed it used so prolificaly in graduate work tho, please show me examples of these sinners!

I wasn't disagreeing with you - i can understand why a student would avoid it (unless they were maiking a point, as in Dan's example). Just wondering why professionals (former students) continue to use it.

I don't think analyzing why 'non-designers' like the font is particularly interesting. Also I don�t think it's particularly interesting that "don't use Comic Sans" has surpassed "Don't use Souvenir" and "If in doubt use Caslon" as a replacement for truly useful typographic advice for non-professionals.

What is interesting is understanding the motivation of the sub-culture of professionals who use it. Are their clients demanding it, are they making some anti-establishment point?

Cheers, Si

I saw a souvenir shop in Vienna whose sign was set in Souvenir. Has anyone ever seen a comic book set in Comic Sans?

I bet that there are clients out there who demand that thier designers use comic sans. I once remade the CI of a law firm. Their old logo was Arial, all caps. I tried for weeks, with three separate presenations to get them to decide upon another typeface. My third-and final-proposal even showed how they'd be better of if they would at least consider switching to Helvetica.

They kept Arial. At least I was able to make it upper and lowercase. This was then followed by my designing the most boring letterhead I have ever made.

This could happen to you too! But it could be Comic Sans, instead of Arial.

Another time, I was working at a summer camp (one time, at band camp...). This was before I started studying graphic design. I was on the team of counselors responsible for working with the campers to create their camp year book (100 pages, double sided, black and white xerox). We had some Pentium 3s running MS Office and Photoshop. I laid out the entire thing using PowerPoint and Comic Sans (I was young and stupid and needed the money, please don't hate me )!