Joe, they're right.

> careware

That's interesting - hadn't heard of it.

> And we're all very lucky we don't live in such barbaric times.

Joe, I'm sorry, but: are you nuts?
Where do you get your news, the Disney channel?
And where have you travelled to recently, Legoland?

--

David, don't think for a second that I won't hold you to the beer thing. :-) But since I didn't type so much (for a change) I'll settle for a quinto.

hhp

Darrel wrote:
Bad knock-offs, I think, are probably the most damaging, as they appear legit, and, technically, may be, but they harm the the integrity of the original work.

Yes, that's very true. When students see a free font that has 'Univers' in its name, they automatically assume that it is indeed Univers, but what they're most likely to get is a hotchpotch of different sanserifs, including a Gill Sans g! (That actually happened before). Knockoffs are already problematic in the commercial font business, it is even harder to pin down in the public domain.

Joseph D. Treacy wrote:
For instance, a large number of the users of pirate font software copies are people who work in the graphic arts. It's often art directors and also production workers at service bureaus. That's been well known since the dawn of desktop publishing.

That's a sad fact. While it's not uncommon to find designers complain about their designs being knocked off or copied by other designers, the majority of desingners are the ones who don't show any respect to intellectual properties when it comes to type designs. Typeface design is such a thankless job. Graphic designers rarely even give credit to the typeface used, never mind the type designer. Why would they even reveal the name of the typeface they used when they didn't even pay for it?!

Honestly, I don't see any cut-and-dry way to solve the font piracy problem. Only education can solve it, I think. I really shouldn't tell you this, but I've had an instructor who made a Zip disk full of fonts available for us to use/copy. Now that's really unethical, and it is terribly damaging to the type business. It makes it normal for designers to copy and pass around fonts. Most people here (I assume) won't even dream of pirating fonts. Why? We are just conscientious? We simply appreciate the beauty of typefaces, respect the talents of those who designed them, and understand how much work it takes to design and produce a great typeface. Only when the these values and artistic appreciation abilities are imparted to the students would they stop pirating fonts. These are acquired skills, and can be learnt. Students have to understand that they don't need every single typeface in the world at their fingertips to do great designs. They have to understand a good type library has to be built gradually, over time.

We are at a transitional period right now, with OpenType, PostScript and TrueType all coexisting and for many, the anxiety over Quark vs InDesign and OSX vs OS9. In the fall, my school will have InDesign 2 on all the Macs over in the Design Department. But, we don't have a single OpenType font! As much as I want to use InDesign with OpenType fonts exclusively for the class, it's going to take a while for the students to make the switch over. So I still have to cover Type 1 vs TrueType, expert sets and the like, and at least give them a taste of OpenType features. A lot of students will be working at home, some will be using PCs. Where on earth could they find decent typefaces to work with? As much as I want them all to go get a copy of Type Classics for Learning, I really can't make them do that. Already they'll have to get a couple of required texts, storage media, pay for printing, supplies and presentation material, how can I convince them to spend another $100 on type that may or may not work with the software they'll be working with? I'm trying to get the school to buy a site license for Type Classics for Learning, but that's going to take at least a semester, or even a year.

David Earls wrote:
Far better, I think, to put your philosophies into practice. Work on opensource or freeware lines and prove to people that there is room for more than one philosophical standpoint on property. Create a typeface of worth and use that will stand the test of time, and give it away, or dare to think of alternative licensing schemes.

Yes, alternative licensing schemes. I personally think that we should have access to each and every font available commercially at any given time (perhaps over the web). So we could test them on our own layouts and to show clients. Once we've decided that we want to use it for a particular project, we would then pay the foundry. That would be a very attractive licensing scheme. But I guess it would only encourage more pirates, unless we have a tracking system in place.

Type design is not a multi-million business. A lot of foundries are one-person operations. The economic return is quite minimal compared to say advertising, or even editorial design work. Yet the effort one has to put into a type design is enormous. We do it, because we love it. There's no question about it. Kudos to people like Victor Gaultney, who's making such an exquisite, extensive and useful text face available to the public. They always have my greatest respect.

We are at a transitional period right now, with OpenType, PostScript and TrueType all coexisting and for many, the anxiety over Quark vs InDesign and OSX vs OS9. In the fall, my school will have InDesign 2 on all the Macs over in the Design Department. But, we don't have a single OpenType font!

ID 2.0 ships with a number of OT fonts including four weights of Adobe Caslon Pro and at least one weight of Caflisch Script Pro, as well as a number of expensive CJK OT fonts. The new OT revision of the $99 Adobe Type Basics is a good second step toward a library of richly featured OT fonts.

Hi John

The academic version of InDesign does not come with any fonts, OpenType or otherwise. :-(

The Adobe Type Basics package looks like an incredibily good buy!

>>'European's' certainly are possessive, it appears.
OK, my typo, good reply!


>>I think that colonial history doesn't apply to this discussion.
You're right, but the fact that the concept of property is not straightforward is relevant to this discussion of property rights.

where is the type basics package? I can't find it anywhere on their site.

http://www.adobe.com/type/collections.html

It looks like a good deal, but theres no mention at Adobe UK of the opentype version. The UK Type Basics version seems rather less attractive...

http://www.transaction-one.com/gs/html/a/adobe/fontstore/en/type/browser/P/P_934.jsp

See what I mean? Anyone know if the OT version is available in Europe yet, or if its likely to be coming soon? The pesky US store dont let you order if you're outside US/Canada.

Joseph D. Treacy typed:

"'European's' certainly are possessive, it appears.
I think that colonial history doesn't apply to this discussion. It's intriguing, of course. And we're all very lucky we don't live in such barbaric times."

How lucky you are, it

H

"Classics for Learning"
400 fonts for $99

This is an example of the retail practice known as "Dumping", i.e. a company with deep pockets flooding the market with cheap product to boost market share and drive out competitors.

Colleges and design schools should beware of thinking that buying the Adobe package fits the bill. 400 fonts from one foundry is bad education.

To provide a well-rounded education, schools should expose students to the rich variety of contemporary type design. Sure, include some of Adobe's brilliant typefaces, to represent the mainstream, but students should work with fonts from other important type "movements/subcultures/genres", that I won't attempt to categorize, but how about: FontFont; House; Emigre; FontBureau. You get the picture.

To provide a well-rounded education, schools should expose students to the rich variety of contemporary type design. Sure, include some of Adobe's brilliant typefaces, to represent the mainstream, but students should work with fonts from other important type "movements/subcultures/genres", that I won't attempt to categorize, but how about: FontFont; House; Emigre; FontBureau. You get the picture.

I couldn't agree more, Nick. Money is a problem, though. It's difficult enough to convince a school to buy this cheap mainstream package as it is. At least it's a start of something...

Adobe is not dumping. I did the math. It's 25c per font per CPU. Adobe Font Folio is $3.20/font for 20 CPUs, or 16c per font per CPU. Other foundries charge similarly for their collections. (I'm not certain, but I think Type Classics for Learning is a 1-CPU license.)

Do you also consider FontFolio "dumping?" Because plenty of foundries (and plenty of businesses in general) account for economies of scale in their pricing. Besides, not all the fonts in Type Classics for Learning are ones that I'd regularly find a use for. (Sorry, Hobo.)

$99? If you're in with Adobe, as many schools are, you're actually given the package free of charge. Of course, that's after agreeing not to install Quark and run InDesign exclusively. My not to be mentioned educational employer, has just done this.

Nick:

I'm not taking sides, but dumping is really no different than shopping at Wal-Mart. We all know we should we should support hard working artisans, but, in the end, a large portion of the real world (at least in the US) will take the cheap route, regardless of the circumstances behind the product/service.

All that said (and I'm prepared to take some heat on this... ;o) how much does it really take to make a typeface? I'm sure hundreds of hours for a decent, couple-weight set. Still, even at $100 an hour (a decent profit for most), that's maybe $40,000 in time for 400 hours of work. Sell, the face at $100, you need 400 sales to break even. I'm guessing Adobe has long-ago broken even on many of these faces. Thanks to digital technology, the coninue selling of a digital product takes little ongoing expenditures (I won't get into Adobe's cryptic downloading system that must take a bit of work to maintain...)

John, you're right about economy of scale. You have to buy the entire library to get a 16

> Sell, the face at $100, you need 400 sales

You can't sell a font with two weights (and what about italic?) for $100, and you need many years to get anywhere near 400 units! Unless you're one of the best in the world.

hhp

Keith, a bunch of places will give academic discounts (even if they're not advertised). Hell, Underware lets educational users license Dolly and Sauna for free. I got a quote from Elsner+Flake for my school newspaper, and they also give an academic discount. It wasn't big enough of a discount to fit in our budget, but it was a discount.

I don't think there's much point in figuring in how many hours we've worked on a typeface.... As much as we might like to think we're in an 'industry', there is no question that the investment

> Still, even at $100 an hour (a > decent profit for most), that's maybe $40,000 in time for 400 hours of > work.

How can you assume that $100 an hour provides a decent profit. Have you ever heard of studio overhead?

Thanks Colin. Yes, Underware. Sauna is great!

Keith Tam today asked

>Do any of you know if other foundries have
>educational pricing?


Er...Treacyfaces does. And has for years.

I had recently mentioned on another page:

...ordering four from us, one receives: Family volume discount which lops off about 16% on a purchase of four fonts, then the second version discount taking off the next 50%.

If you're a student or educator, you receive 50% off of all of the above. If you quote the current discount code on our home page, another discount applies.

What I didn't say before was that scenario only discussed four fonts. With larger orders (for instance, dozens or hundreds), the cost savings are even more significant.


James Montalbano said

>How can you assume that $100 an hour provides a decent profit. Have you ever heard of studio overhead?


Quite so, Jim.

I'd venture to say that a number of those who dabble in font making, still living at home with mommy and daddy and accessing this list from their hacked XBox have no idea of professional office overhead. (Say, you remixers out there should try it sometime. Like adventure? Intrigue? Reality shows? It's all there. But, oops! There's a catch: you have to join the real world!)

(To those on this list who do work professionally, of course, you're excluded from that diatribe.) :-)

And do you know that in most markets, even midwest USA, a graphic design rate of $100./hr is in essence a rate from 1982 or so*? (I see the Disney Channel News Hour tells me that the cost of living has gone up since 1982. *I have always tended to regard my own design rate as being at the top end of the range generally quoted by organizations like Graphic Artists Group in compensation reports. That may or may not work for everybody, depending on skill level and market.)

Still, I know that quite a few freelancing graphic designers, even in larger urban markets, charge much less.

And in this economy, I understand that even in markets like Seattle, they're giving creative away.

It's quite sad right now (for the past three to four years, really) for graduates entering the business, as well as for everyone else slaving away in it, trying to deliver credible, forward thinking work.

On the other hand, it can be said that there is a lot of mediocre to simply awful creative out there (yes, even besides the relentlessly ill-conceived stock photo industry print ads!). Such 'creative' probably is worth less. (I generally assume that the creative people who do stock photo industry print ads pay the client to run the work....)

;-)

So, graduates, yes, there is opportunity!

But remember: One way to improve the intrinsic value of creative is (ahem) using high quality fonts in your design and execution. But probably equally important is making type selections that really are unique. Type that's both relevant to topic **and** rarely seen.

Getting excited about a package of 400 fonts that all your colleagues will have, just as with making use of OS fonts or bundled fonts, makes little sense for the graphic designer or art director, competitively.

Interesting. A belief that everything should be free does have a way of coming back to bite you.

Joe

<em>You can't sell a font with two weights (and what about italic?) for $100, and you need many years to get anywhere near 400 units! </em>

But does Adobe?

<em>How can you assume that $100 an hour provides a decent profit. Have you ever heard of studio overhead?</em>

That's my assumption based on my personal overhead. Obviously it will vary. (though for a solo operator, working 20 or so billable hours a week, I don't think that is an outrageous estimate, though admittedly on the lower end.)

My point was simply that Adobe has probably long ago paid for the fonts it is including in the student pack.

Jim, to play devil's advocate, I don't see why a type designer would need much more overhead than the same graphic designers you'd be marketing too.

<em>And do you know that in most markets, even midwest USA, a graphic design rate of $100./hr is in essence a rate from 1982 or so*?</em>

It's been about a year since I was in the private design sector, but $100 was near the top around here (firm rates...not solos). Freelancers can go for much less. But I'm digressing now...

<em>Interesting. A belief that everything should be free does have a way of coming back to bite you.</em>

Not sure if that was directed at me, but I certainly don't believe that. For the record. If anyone cares. ;o)

To my

>Interesting. A belief that everything should
>be free does have a way of coming back to
>bite you.


darrel said

>Not sure if that was directed at me, (...)


It wasn't, darrel. Seriously.

Sorry if I gave that impression.

It was just a general comment, making a(nother likely futile) exercise out of pitting (a mental amalgam of) the foregoing comments (not from anyone in particular) about fonts (which we all know are fiercely overpriced, even shareware, even if each font were bundled with 1,000 free mp3s) needing to be free (or nearly so) against what can happen in markets (oh, either the US market or the world market) when people (who should, after all, know better) stop buying things (everything, not just fonts).

That's all. I don't snipe. :-)

Joe

> studio overhead

Nobody can deny that a studio -especially one in a prime location like James's- has a lot of overhead. But the question is, how valuable is a studio in the first place, especially these days? Sure, there's nothing like physical human contact, but it's not indispensable. Type design in particular has extremely low production and iteration costs. My biggest font-related client right now is an institution I've never even visited, via a contact I've never seen or even heard on the phone. And most significantly, I could be doing that project -and many of the other projects I've done over the past 3 years- while living anywhere in the world with a decent internet connection. And in many such places $100/hr is an astronomical rate - you could live like a king! For example, monthly rent in a very nice 2-bedroom apartment in Yerevan is about $200. Plus if you need to physically visit a client once in a while, about ten hours of work at $100 will get you there and back via Heathrow no problem!

So when you think of rates, don't limit the equation to working in midtown Manhattan, or even anywhere in the West. Why do you think Bangalore is exploding with employment right now? This ain't Kansas anymore.

--

> you have to join the real world!

Different things are real to different people - to me there's nothing real about working like a slave most of your waking like and wasting your weekends resting like a vegetable. And it depends what you want. If your involvement in type design revolves around simply making money (to spend on whatever, or to retire in physical comfort) then you invest what you need to establish the facade some old-fashioned, old-money clients might require. But if you want to be remembered by future generations (the way Gutenberg and Garamond are, even though they died paupers), a studio and a library of 70s throwbacks won't do jackshit for you. Most of what you need to be remembered (as opposed to die rich) is totally free - although certainly not easy to get.

hhp

> $100 was near the top around here (firm rates...not solos). Freelancers can go for much less.

There was a National Salary and Fee survey done in 2001 by the Society of Graphic Designers of Canada that shows some interesting information regarding billing rates, salary and compensation packages.
I would expect that you have an similar survey in the USA that reflects even higher rates.

The PDF file can be viewed here.

Hrant

I totally agree with your above posting.

gln

Hrant said

> And in many such places $100/hr is
>an astronomical rate


Of course, the reference (I believe) was strictly speaking to locations in the USA. And in US Dollars.

Yes, such a rate doesn't apply straightforwardly to many markets, let alone other countries.

On the other hand, there are also cultural differences that will lead to projects being handled differently (possibly better, possibly worse) by commissioning a typeface or a type-related design in a different country. Like it or not, there are tactile national differences. Therefore, clients commissioning between continents may not get the bargain they think they're ordering.

Your virtual customer experience won't apply to all customers.

Quite a lot of clients need extensive hand holding, and they need a physical studio to meet at. Quite a few clients demand a Manhattan or similarly cosmopolitan location.

Quite a few of them use it to simply get out of their office as much as they can. That doesn't make them bad clients; they just need face-to-face. Plus, many want to be more a part of the process.

But when I was talking about the studio overhead comparison above, I wasn't even using a top-dollar cosmopolitan location as the high end to justify the concept of overhead.

Just a middle to lower-end setup like you describe. One step above working atop the fishbowl, with the keyboard on the toaster.


>a studio and a library of
>70s throwbacks won't do jackshit for you

What in the world do you mean by that language, exactly?

Joe

Hrant said

> to me there's nothing real about
>working like a slave most of your
>waking like and wasting your weekends
>resting like a vegetable


Is there anyone here on this list that believes that designing type, running a studio or a foundry is just plain drudgery?

If so, and I mean this as a friend: get out now.

To me, this has never been 'work' or slaving.

Sure, long hours, sometimes. But it's more exhilirating than ever.

I would hope that everyone who cares enough about type to frequent this list (even as a lurker) would agree.

Apart from troubleshooting font problems where customers don't even know anything about their own computer, and rants about all type needing to be free as little butterflies, I can't think of any aspect of this that isn't thrilling.

We're working in type at the greatest moment for it in history.

Joe

> Quite a few clients demand a Manhattan or similarly cosmopolitan location.

Fortunately those dinosaurs are getting rarer.
And along with them the types of fonts they've so adore for 30 years already.

> Apart from troubleshooting font problems where customers don't even know anything ....

Oh, I've been through that. One time I had to explain to somebody -over the phone- where the semicolon is... only to realize after 10 minutes of mounting frustration that he didn't know how the Shift key works.

> We're working in type at the greatest moment for it in history.

Agreed!

hhp