New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Create an account
Typophile RSS | More Feeds
I can't figure out what this font is:
ITC Gaillard seemed to be a close comparison, but I'm not quite sure.
Thanks a lot!
If you mean Galliard, then no, definitely not.
Linotype Old Style No. 1?
Thanks akira1975 for the reference to the previous thread.
If mr_h's image is in fact Linotype Old Style No. 1, then Mark Simonson's comment seems spot on:
Your sample is an old Linotype face called Old Style No. 1. I don't think it has been digitized (other than Andrew Leman's distressed version). Century Old Style is similar in details, but heavier (as Nick mentioned). Bruce Old Style is closer in terms of weight and feel, but differs in the details.
I just want to footnote the reference to Andrew Leman's version. It not deliberately distressed. Rather it's the product of an apparently unedited auto-trace intended to produce a font good enough for use as a "prop font" in movies etc.
Perhaps Linotype Old Style No. 1 is not digitized because it does not seem particularly interesting for contemporary book publishing, particularly with the rise of e-books, which work best with fonts optimized for screen reading. It's a lot of work to make a proper book text font and very few are produced for this shrinking market, compared to the flood of new fonts for advertising, web, games etc.
IMHO most people would not notice much difference between the LT OS and the Bruce OS digitized by BT.
From the Linotype catalog of 1905:
thank you everyone for your replies! I didn't have a single clue before, it's such a great help!
I'm new to this font/type world, but if a font is not 'digitized', does that mean it's not available for editing use at all?
To add a little perspective, this is from a book that was printed in 2000 (although it is a 'photographic reprint', so the original might be older than that), and now my assignment is to do a reproduction of the book - for reprinting. Relating this to Don's opinion about the font
Another question - this is not 100% related to fonts, but I'm guessing the type experts here would know..? If I'm starting with a book (an actual physical copy), and I have to make a reproduction of it, would it be possible to just scan it and print it off? Because if the font is not available for digital use, it does complicate things a bit.
Again, thank you so much for the responses, those really help me with my work!
Somewhat off topic for font ID. But for what it is worth, a few comments on your questions.
Options for a book reprint are yet another photo reprint, assuming the source copy is in good shape. Or OCR the book and choose a font. This will take longer than the first option because it requires proofreading the OCR results.
IMHO the font can be quite different than the original and legibility/readability factors dominate. Depends on the subject matter. If the book is very time & place specific then its enjoyable to pick a font that is appropriate for the era. If you like the tone of the LT Old Style No. 1, then the Bruce version would work fine. Most readers won't notice this substitution. Indeed, most readers only notice a book font if it is hard to read.
Thanks for your willingness to answer this off-topic question here..
We've decided to do the scan & OCR method, that's why I'm looking for the typeface of the text.
I think at this point I'll try out the Bruce version and a couple other alternative mentioned in the linked post.
I actually don't know a thing about typefaces and design - so all the help here from everyone is greatly appreciated!
This IS a standard Linotype font and was used in many 20th century books. It's tempting to digitize it, the LT specimen of 1905 includes the many special characters, accents, symbols etc. that were available as part of the font, but I can't see much in the way of commercial sales for it, particularly since I couldn't sell it as a book text font under it's original name. And sales of book fonts are abysmal unless they are sold by LT or other ultra established foundries such as Hoefler & Frere Jones. Unlike old display fonts where there is no problem with anyone using a new name and promoting it in flashy context. Anyway, the Bruce should work fine.