I think most people would have to try to make/finish a font -not to
mention get people to buy it- to realize that prices are actually LOW.

hhp

do you/they know any freebie plumber? car? house?

They also cited not being able to convince clients to pay for the purchase of a new font if a freebie (or previously purchased) one is available — even if it is lesser quality or not as appropriate for the design.

My friend Mike explains to a client about the cost of a logo: “It took 20 years experience to create this logo.” Its not how long it takes to create the glyphs (physically) its the “x” years of experience to get to the point where you can create the glyphs.

Using fonts with quality spacing and a full compliment of extras can save the graphic designer time — huge amounts of time in a text heavy project like a magazine, newsletter, or book. That means a lower cost for the client and a quicker turnaround. In the long run, good fonts pay for themselves.

As I told my mother-in-law (non-designer): a bulk of the work that goes into a good text face is not the letters, but the spaces between them. If you never think about the spacing of the type, then the designer did a good job. Ask them how hard it is, really, to draw and design a logo. I mean, the client gives them most of the answers and the logo’s so simple.

Right?

Of course not. As for the hours involved: people I’ve spoken two can spend 8 hours on a few characters. Seriously, I surprised that working professional designers are even debating this. Do they not know what it’s like to have people completely undervalue and hard-to-explain process? Any font’s cost can be built into a job, or over the course of multiple jobs if they dont’ want to charge outright.

Seriously, those people need to grow up. Do they steal their photography too?

I’ve made it a policy to always be up front about fonts and how much they cost. I only look to freebee fonts if I need something that’s very visual/novelty/display oriented. They’re shooting themselves in the foot if they lead off with “Well, this font that costs $300 is great, but if you want I can find a free one that’s not as good”. Sounds like the problem is client relationship management and managing expectations.

You get what you pay for.

>Recently, in a local group of designers, a hot debate arose.

...was this online, or in a meet-up type environment? I’d like to think it was in the basement of an old-school printers office in the industrial part of St Louis, where designers meet once a month to drink whisky, smoke smuggled-in Cubans etc., But I’m likely wrong.

Reason I ask is that you’d likely be able to find a local type designer to come in and give a talk on what it takes to design a font. That would serve to educate the graphic designers as to the process, and might even lead to custom work for the type designer.

Cheers, Si

This comes up with me *all the time* when I’m teaching typography. After suffering the same inarticulate frustrations as you, I end up getting into some rather arcane details re the time spent with kerning pairs, hinting (which I am practically making up as i go along), bezier curves and all sorts of shit that they’re too young to know, but with which they are quite impressed.

One of the things i do is show them some screen captures from FontLab of the character sets and outlines of free fonts vs. a good commercial font. I tell them how many free fonts contain incomplete character sets, and how many of them are quickly and roughly autotraced, and i zoom in on the horrors of hundreds of twisted bezier points. Then I show them some breathtaking outlines from e.g. Ross Mills’ Plantagenet and go on and on about how much time it takes to make that perfect, and how when you print these at large sizes you can see the beauty of the curves blah blah blah.

I also warn them that poorly constructed fonts can cause Postscript errors (which may not even be true), acne and heart disease.

I also encourage them, if they must use free fonts (and poor wee students always do), to go to good font designers’ sites (of which i provide them a list), and try some of the free fonts they have on offereing which are either “teasers” or sometimes abandoned projects, but bound to be better constructed than what they might find at zang-o-fonts or whereverthehell they’re picking up this shit.

How truthful any of this is undoubtedly debatable, but I too would appreciate a little more weaponry in this crusade of explanation.

Incredibly, a student recently noted the poor spacing in the free font they used for a headline, and the time they spent to fix it.

-marian

What is a current hourly rate for plumbing?
What is a current hourly rate for graphic design?
What is a current hourly rate for flipping burgers?
What is a current hourly rate for typeface design?

Guess what order the hourly rate would be in with the highest on top?

The above order is about right.

ChrisL

> spend 8 hours on a few characters.

Or one character. That in fact has been the top end of time-per-glyph
since the coldmetal days. And it’s been my average on Maral and Mana-16.

hhp

Quoting sii:
…was this online, or in a meet-up type environment? I’d like to think it was in the basement of an old-school printers office in the industrial part of St Louis, where designers meet once a month to drink whisky, smoke smuggled-in Cubans etc., But I’m likely wrong.

Oh, geez. I’m likely to get my butt kicked out of my little local group now, aren’t I?

To answer the question: both. It was an on-line discussion in preparation for a meet-up which hasn’t happened yet. But no dark smokey rooms — just the coffee bar at Borders in posh West County. (Though whisky would be a great addition!)

Hm... I think there would be a lot of value in finding a ’guest expert’ on the topic. Unfortunately, I don’t know any local type designers, which is why I turned to Typophile.

If free fonts are so great, why are they complaining at all?

I look at it this way. A sheet of Letraset dry transfer lettering cost about $6.00 in 1980. That’s about $15.25 in 2005 dollars. A digital font typically costs about twice that. Let’s compare value:

Useful life
   Sheet of Letraset: Useless as soon as you run out of a character you need.
   Digital font: Indefinite as long there is operating system support; never run out

Flexibility
   Sheet of Letraset: Limited to one size; can be enlarged or reduced with generational loss
   Digital font: Infinitely scalable with no loss of quality

Character set
   Sheet of Letraset: 100 or so characters, depending on font; larger number means you run out of individual characters sooner
   Digital font: Over 200

Availability
   Sheet of Letraset: About 400 fonts in 1980; popular fonts were often on back order at dealers
   Digital font: Over 30,000 commercial fonts in 2005; fonts can be downloaded and used minutes after purchase and are never out of stock

Ease of use
   Sheet of Letraset: Spacing and alignment depend on skill of user; slow process
   Digital font: Spacing and alignment are automatic; as fast as typing

Special effects
   Sheet of Letraset: Dependent on mechanical manipulation or special photographic equipment
   Digital font: Unlimited digital effects and manipulation possible

Back in 1980, designers happily paid for sheets of Letraset, even with its numerous practical limitations. We’re talking cheap designers for the most part. If you had a budget, you sent out for type at a much higher price.

For about twice that price (taking into account inflation), digital type is many times more than twice the value.

Perhaps it’s not fair to compare digital fonts to Letraset sheets. What about fonts for typesetting machines in 1980? First, you need a typesetting machine, which was $5,000-$10,000 for a low-end model ($12,500-$25,000 in 2005 dollars). A font for a low-end typesetting machine was roughly $75 (and you usually had to buy them four at a time because of the way the machines worked) which is about $190 in 2005 dollars.

No matter how you look at it, digital fonts are a better value than any previous format, even at twice the typical price. True, the development costs are lower, too, but it still takes considerable time and effort to create a good quality font. In any case, it’s not the development costs that determine the price people are willing to pay.

The availability of free fonts is the only reason people are complaining about the price. If they can’t tell the difference, what’s the problem? They should just use the free ones. If they can tell the difference, then it should be obvioius why good fonts are not free.

True story:

I was asked to typeset a job for a major organization; not design it, just set it. I finish the 175 pages of text, using the freeware grunge typewriter font they’ve provided for heads and subs. The body is set in Times.

And now, they say, we need it set in French. Ok, I say, but wait: there’s no extended characters in this font. “What can we do? The English is already set.”

A day is lost, then I edit the font, adding the accents needed to set French, and I bill them for the work.

If they had begun with say, FF Trixie Plain, it would have cost them $40, and they would have something better than my hacked together accents.

Good thing it was only French. If it had been CE, you would have had a much bigger job.
Penny wise and pound foolish is the sad state we live in.

Gee, I can get a butcher to do my gall bladder surgury. He charges by the pound. Those damn surgeons charge WAY too much. I’ll bet I can even get a kid learning to be a butcher to cut me open for free? Maybe I will just hang out in East St Louis bars and some thug will just cut me open right then and there with no appointment needed and no forms to fill out?

ChrisL

Another way to look at it:

If font prices were too high, not enough people would be willing pay them and the commercial foundries would go out of business.

There is no converting a designer who would quibble about the price of a font be it digital or metal. There is no need to rationalize about the many many hours and days that go into the fitting of a font, or into the kerning pairs of same.

My respose is that here is no longer anything in this world that is cheap that is also any good. There are cheap and free fonts out there for those who put no more value on a good tye design than they do a bad one; so the bad ones are there for the bottom feeders to use.

This whole “how cheap can I get it?” attitude has discouraged me to the point that I don’t care if I ever design digital font again.

If this seems whiney: tough! I’ve had it with people who claim to appreciate type nearly to distraction but won’t drop a few bucks to use it. I have had students approach me with packages of more than 1000 fonts that they got for $29.95. They are invariably crappy work.

And now I don’t know if I can post this or not, but here goes . . .

Jim

Bonafide graphic designers should definitely be slapped around for even suggesting such a thing, but the student problem is an ongoing issue. They have not yet learned to tell the difference between **** Times Roman and Galliard, let alone the subtleties in spacing and kerning. They can’t even spot fake bolds or italics, and when I demonstrate the evils of squishing and squashing type they look at each other like “I can’t see the difference, can you see the difference?”. Jesus H. Christ! Explaining what you get from a “good” font is a hard sell, and believe me the “why, in *my* day ...” argument doesn’t cut it with them.

I send them to sites like this, and wherever useful discussions about type are taking place (and i will probably send them to this thread), and mostly they just think we’re all **** mad (when my teaching succeeds, they join the madness).

To be honest, in some ways perhaps the most compelling argument for budding, fashion-conscious designers might be that “The more expensive a typeface is, the more exclusive it is. It’s like Armani or Valentino.” Shit. That, they would understand.

[I see this is a clean, family-oriented forum, sans swearing. Jus’ testing that out.]
-marian

Not a Christian forum tho’. Interesting.
-marian

engelhardt,

I go through this everyday as a design student. Having taken the oppurtunity to design my first face this year I understand the blood, sweat, and tears that are poured into a type design. Not only am I surrounded by students who think I’m the crazy one, because I pay for fonts that they pass around to each other, but also teachers that do the same thing in the professional world. I’m actually launching a “Say NO to font piracy” campaign at school.

They would not be speculating how hard it is to make a font if they were not using poorly crafted freebies in the first place.

How much do these freelancers charge for their services? How do their hourly rates average out? Now, how long would it take for them to create the fonts they are using? It’s going to be far more than any font licensing fee.

> there is no longer anything in this world
> that is cheap that is also any good.

Good point, although I wouldn’t say “world”. Just outside “civilization” there’s a real world where you can find good cheap stuff now and again. Like my favorite falafel joint (in ’Aaisha Bakkaar, Beirut) or the custom backgammon set woodcarvers in Yerevan.

hhp

There you go again, Hrant... always with the falafel and backgammon.

But that brings up a good point. Even in within the font market, prices are different. I’ve found that Londoners tend to jack up their prices. Minnesotan prices are perhaps more affordable. (a generalization) But cost of living does come into play, even in font design.

Hmmm... another topic altogether? “Global Economics and the Rising Costs of Digital Fonts”?

In fact I’m a believer in having different pricing depending on the customer.

hhp

i say if they want to use true “free fonts,” let them. but file sharing is just wrong. how do you think they’d like it if their clients stiffed them for their design services?

“how do you think they’d like it if their clients stiffed them for their design services?”

The trouble is, that it is a lot harder to “share” a logo design. After all, type is just a bunch of letters.
It was lot tougher to “share” in the hot metal days. In those days you would at least get a hernia for your efforts :-)

ChrisL

I sense a shakeout in design. What we need though is a demand for good design. I suspect those that can’t afford a font or sell one to a client for that matter won’t be around long. Myself included. I have some lame clients and their image blows because they wouldn’t have it any other way. I just try to transition to better clients and assume that those that can’t see to take advantage of what I can do can’t last asl long as me. Those clients get cheap or free type, I’m sorry to say. Theft is just that though, and designers do get ripped off as well.

The shake out is in progress. Design is the new acting. Many more students than jobs. You want fries with that?

Do Lauren’s fellow St Louis designers fall into this boat? By attending the meet-up aren’t they trying to rise above this? They’re seeking the knowledge, even if they’re not yet true believers. Are they worth reaching out to?

Is there not a font preacher in the area who can reach out to the unencoded? Can I get an amen?

[I see this is a clean, family-oriented forum, sans swearing. Jus’ testing that out.]

What the fuсk you talkin’bout?

Homographic swearing: another reason to love Unicode. :)

John — hahah, I was actually thinking about doing the same thing... then I scroll down and see your post. ;)

I’d steer clear of a tent revival, but I also promised myself to steer clear of intoxicated cussing fits on Typophile. (It’s embarrassing to wake up to the day after.)

Until the ’unencoded’ are typographically smothered by their excessive font library or are finally enlightened by some mystical, personal encounter with good type design, I’d say leave them on their prodigal paths. We learn best by our mistakes. Lord knows we’ve all had to use some pathetic ones. Made me want to design my own.

Just pick up the nearest bottle to hand & swing, Swing like you never swung before in your life. Then smile the smile of the just & the righteous. A bit too much Nick Cave I suppose...

What is a current hourly rate for flipping burgers?
What is a current hourly rate for typeface design

Sorry, friends, you are missing the point. Do you ever consider how long it took a musician to write a song? Or Picasso to paint a picture? If it was all based on hourly rates, all books, songs, photographs and certainly fonts would be free once the originator had his investment in time and materials back (plus marketing & distribution expenses). Those items would thus only cost the price of production like printing and CD-copying etc.

Of course this is rubbish. Things are worth what they contribute. A song or a painting only
contribute happiness, culture, esthetic pleasure, but we’re willing to pay for them. (Leaving aside speculation like the art business here) If a designer uses paper, he needs to buy it. Same for inks, pens and other materials. A font costs between 29 and 49 dollars, but you can use it over and over (thanks, Mark, for the Letraset comparison), and it generates wealth for the client and the designer. It makes a piece more desirable, more legible, more functional. If we didn’t need more type, there wouldn’t be any. And if clients don’t want to have 49 dollars added to the bill, they’re not clients, but leeches.

The only problem I see is the risk of buying a family for, say, 100 dollars and not getting to use it. For a small studio, that can quickly add a few hundred a months in speculative font expenses. So, if you’re a bona fide designer and have a record of paying proper licenses and also getting you clients to pay for theirs (that’s where the money is for type designers), talk to you favourite font supplier. They may give you an open CD with a lot of fonts on it plus a contract. That’ll state that you agree to buy a license once any of these fonts ever get used in earnest, i.e. in a publication in whatever medium. If you honour the trust invested in you, you’ll get to use thousands of fonts for you presentations, for your own experiments and research, but you only get to pay for them once you get paid. We all know that we only use the fonts we have on our hard drives, at least until we know what we want, typographically speaking. That’s why some of us would even consider looking at freebies.

And finally: my rule of thumb is 100 hours per weight. So an average family these days with 12 weights (some of which, like small caps, may be less work) would take you at least 800 hours, i.e. 20 business weeks or 12 normal designer weeks. It takes a lot of 100 dollar sales (of which designer normally get around 20% if they don’t do their own distribution) to pay for that time, even at modest rates. And out of the 30,000 or so fonts I am just editing for the new FontBook, not even 5% ever pay their designers that investment back.

The trouble is, that it is a lot harder to “share” a logo design

And as Quark found out, it is usually spotted quickly.

Erik,
“not even 5% ever pay their designers that investment back.”

That was exactly my point when I compared hourly rates of burger-flippers to Glyph-grinders. The title of the tread is “The High Price of Type” and the sub-question was “what is so hard about designing it anyway”.
The “Leeches” you spoke of don’t care any more about “what they [typefaces] contribute” than they do about “hourly rates...”. A vulture is a vulture, feeding on decay.
The sad truth is that most small, beginning design offices have to put up with all manners of clients to survive. It is a rare designer who gets to pick and choose clients. I am glad to see that your suggestion about “open disk” will at least allow them to pick and choose type by merit rather than if they already own it. This is a win-win situation for foundries as well as graphic design offices. The less-than-stellar clients may not recognize the value no matter how you phrase it but at least the designer can feel they did the best job they could with the design.
Bravo Eric, I hope other font houses will follow your lead on this.

ChrisL

I think a valid point is the fact that sometimes you buy a font and don’t get to use it. During two projects I recently bought Bryant and Delicato and it turned out both didn’t work for the respective jobs. Notbecause the clients disliked them but because once used in the real document, I didn’t like the final look. It just didn’t fit, it wasn’t what I thought it’d look like. So... While I figure that maybe I’ll get to use them some day, it still was pretty frustrating, and again I found that you can’t judge a font by looking at it online, be it PDF or even a typesetter-tool. The only way to judge it is to work with it on a job, print some stuff and SEE first-hand if it works in context.

Apart from that, I don’t think fonts are too expensive. While the collector in me wants to have them all, to have maximum choice, and while as a small bureau it’s indeed a factor that you cannot just buy a new typeface for some low-budget-jobs, no maztter how much you’d like to, I still almost never feel ripped off by most foundries. There are exceptions, such as TEFF, but all in all, I think there is a large collection of fonts that are available and at 200-400 € for a family don’t feel overpriced at all. Especially if they’re OTF.

HD Schellnack

First of all — thank you everyone for your insight! This has become a great discussion.

Secondly — I feel somewhat compelled to defend my fellow St Louis designers who sparked this conversation. I’d hate you to think we’re all a bunch of uneducated, font-pirating, middle-American back-woods hacks. There are a lot of talented people in this group, which is all the more reason why this debate got under my skin.

That said... someone on the “other side” of the argument brought up this point:

If fonts were more affordable (in this case, it was implied that would mean just a few dollars per typeface/weight), they would sell to more people. Therefore, type designers would make more money by selling at a higher volume. This theory suggests that they are the ones taking money away from themselves by making their product too exclusive.

What do the industry insiders think of this theory?

Also, the question came up of why “classic,” “public domain” typefaces (like Garamond, Caslon, etc) are still charged at a premium price when the original designers are now long-dead. (Well... I know that someone had to digitize that font — but for argument’s sake, there’s the question that was posed).

The more volume argument has limitations. There is a finite market for fonts. This is not a broad consumer market. What would happen is the number of sales would double but the amount of money the font designer gets would drop to 20% of what they get now. My argument is that fonts are already very cheap and have come down a lot in recent years. The amount of piracy has increased though so there is no gain for the type designer.

ChrisL

> Also, the question came up of why “classic,” “public domain” typefaces (like Garamond, Caslon, etc) are still charged at a premium price when the original designers are now long-dead.

Stating the obvious. In a way doing a high-quality revival of a typeface where a lot of competition already exists is harder than doing an original design. You have to bring something new to the table. That might include going back to original source material and doing a truer version, or it might mean adding weights, styles that didn’t exist originally, or it might mean adding bells and whistles that the competition doesn’t have. Compare old Adobe Garamond v Adobe Garamond Premier Pro and on glyph count along I bet the new version is better value for money - and the OpenType features makes it much more powerful.

>In a way doing a high-quality revival of a typeface where a lot of competition already exists is harder than doing an original design.

Full reply:

I have to disagree with the philosophy you’re expressing, which measures the value of design in quantitative terms, thereby supporting the price-carpers: If a font is going to be valued for the number of features it contains, and the user get similar high-quality features free with bundled InDesign/Mac/MS fonts, than any price is going to seem too expensive.

It is a mistake to value a restyling of a classic as much as an original design.
Certainly, it can take as much work to do a revival as an original, but that begs the question of the value of the kind of work involved — it suggests that original design is undervalued in relation to production work and revivals.

How to overcome the perception that computer designed work is not worth much because it’s mere technical grunt labor? Or stuff any kid could do with the right software? Not by apologetically rationalizing prices, explaining all the skilled technical effort involved, because you can always get that kind of labor cheaper, or diluted to nothing in a multi-national’s commodity.

If you must, charge a premium price for giving an old whore a facelift, with all the OpenType deelybobs, but also demand top dollar for a staggering new work of genius even if it’s only available in good old Type 1.

Short version;

Pay up, it’s f****** brilliant.

Nick,
I really like the short version:-)

ChrisL

Nick, is your marketing strategy working?

I just wonder if the outreach/education work people like SoTA, the TDC, the Type Club of Toronto, the Typographic Circle etc., do make their host cities (Toronto, London, NYC) better places to sell type - it seems as if you feel these efforts are a waste of time.

The line that divides Whores from Ladies is
not age, but whether it’s for Display or Text.

hhp

I am not sure if this point has already been raised, but maybe the issue isn’t the cost of fonts, but that so many are available free packaged with software.

It seems to me that people complain about the cost of fonts because they assume they are free, like Comic Sans, Times and Arial.

Comic Sans, Times and Arial are NOT free, but because they are bundeled in with the cost of the software, that is the impression designers (and lay man) have.

But this attitude of not wanting to pay for fonts is typical of designers (especially the small, freelance types, of which I am one). They also don’t like to pay for photo and illustration rights, nor software. If computers were clonable, you can bet freelance designers would be copying them too!

Why? Becasue it is terribly hard to make money as a small, freelance designer.

But what these individuals don’t think about, is what this attitude is doing to the design industry! By not supporting the rest of the industry, these desigers will some day find themselves all alone, trying to defend the cost of design in front of their client, when the client is asking why his secretary can’t do the same job with Office and some free MS Fonts...

In a way, the cost of fonts helps give a designer a reason to charge a real price for his work. And the designers appreciation of the finer points of a well-designed font is what makes him worth the money.

I noticed there was a comment on sometimes buying fonts and not using them in the end.

I have had this frustrstaing exepriece on occasion (most recently with H&FJ’s Gotham, imagine!). It happens, but I have never regreted it.

We have gotten into the habit of adding about 150$ to our price estimates for buying a font, even if we won’t necessarily use it for the project. That way, we are able to exapnd our font library without feeling that we are cutting into our overhead, and the more contracts we have, the more fonts we can buy! (We don’t indicate that we will be buying a font to the client, it is an internal thing, if you will)

ut this attitude of not wanting to pay for fonts is typical of designers...

Then let them draw their own letterforms, do their own spacing and kerning, take their own photos, draw their own illustrations and if they want to keep saving, they should build their own computers and write their own sofware while their at it! If they had to do these things, do you think they’d bitch about having to pay $39 for a font???

If fonts were more affordable (in this case, it was implied that would mean just a few dollars per typeface/weight), they would sell to more people

People who use this argument cannot possible make a living as designers themselves. Do they only charge whatever they need by dividing your living expenses into the hours you can work? And forget about new equipment, software, rent, the times you do not work? Designers who sell through publishers get 20% from the retail price, the rest is spent on marketing (who do you think pays for websites, booklets, support, OT conversions etc?), production, retail discounts (that’s usually 50%), and – mainly – those fonts that never sell or hardly. Like everywhere else, 80% of revenue comes from 20% of the products, but everybody wants to be able to choose from thousands of them.

And why should revival fonts be any cheaper than new ones? Are books by Shakespeare any cheaper than those by contemporary authors? Book publishers also make their money with a few bestsellers which support all the unknown names. Would we want to do without these? And only have Helvetica, Garamond, Bodoni and a few others? Those could be cheap, because there is no license to pay and no advertising to make them known. The same designers who complain about 29 dollars for a font would be the first ones to complain about lack of choice. I knew a system like that once: it was across the Wall here in Berlin and called East Germany. As a designer, you were told what to design and when, what typefaces to use, what paper to print on and how much you could charge. And if the state didn’t think you fitted in as a designer, they would send you into a factory. For those who liked a non-risk life, this was great. The others ran away into the West or took to the streets until the Wall came down.

One thing that does bother me though (aside from not knowing John’s fancy tricks for swearing online), is the aspect of not being able to test-drive before buying a font.

Yes, most websites have some sort of preview/tester/engine thingy, but all the ones i have seen will test only a few words at a large-ish size. Great if you’re thinking of using it for display but most of the time I’m buying for text usage, and I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve bought a font thinking it was exactly what I was looking for, only to find that set as text, it’s not giving the flavour I had in mind. Buying fonts you never use really is upsetting. That, I have to admit, is a major deterrent for me buying fonts. (Do I resort to piracy? No, I just use the same ones over and over and over.)

-marian

Design is the new acting. Many more students than jobs. You want fries with that?
That is my reality, and many other people I know.

People who use this argument cannot possible make a living as designers themselves. Do they only charge whatever they need by dividing your living expenses into the hours you can work?

Erik, I think all that was being said is that this method could sell more product. To me its like high end vs. broad consumer merchandising. Higher price points move less product. Lower price points move more product. Both have the potential to make the same profit. I see that as a valid argument. To me its like Gucci vs. Levi’s Jeans. Both make a good amount of money. Levi’s makes money by selling more pairs of jeans, Gucci makes money selling fewer pairs of higher priced jeans.

I think a huge problem here is educating the public to understand just what typography is and what is involved in making it. In a nutshell this is what seems to be what we’re all debating:

How do we prove or demonstrate the VALUE of type? Until this question is answered the debate will never end. Getting the consumer to understand the VALUE of type is where I think the answer is.

Buying fonts you never use really is upsetting.

May I remind you of what I wrote a day ago:

...if you’re a bona fide designer and have a record of paying proper licenses and also getting you clients to pay for theirs (that’s where the money is for type designers), talk to you favourite font supplier. They may give you an open CD with a lot of fonts on it plus a contract. That’ll state that you agree to buy a license once any of these fonts ever get used in earnest, i.e. in a publication in whatever medium. If you honour the trust invested in you, you’ll get to use thousands of fonts for you presentations, for your own experiments and research, but you only get to pay for them once you get paid....

Lobby your font reseller, publisher, online distributor.

To me its like Gucci vs. Levi’s Jeans

That is a totally wrong comparison. While it’s true that certain goods carry a premium while not necessarily being better than others, some brands do deliver better value. A Mercedes Benz will still keep its value better than a Ford, but most of the perceived value is in design and – of course – prestige. But a Mercedes Benz will also get you from A to B reliably. Guccy, however, hardly delivers on the practical scale, it is all about prestige – what the neighbours think. I cannot think of any typefaces that one would buy for prestige only. But the functional issues are important, very much like the zippers on Levis jeans would not break easily. With type, you do pay for brand value, because you know that fonts from certain foundries will be technically sound and come from legal sources.

Erik has it right on both of these points. Develop a relationship with your local font maker, you’d be surprised what can be done!

Indeed. We licensed Rawlinson from Terminal Design because James and I know each other, and we were able to talk about various requests we had. Until I met him (and Gary Munch and others at the TDC), font licensing was always very impersonal.

>Nick, is your marketing strategy working?

The motivation for outreach is not primarily self-interest. There’s no substitute for a good corporate identity, an aggressive marketing and PR program, ongoing product development and frequent new releases, an up-to-date web site with the latest functionality and frequent new material, etc, etc. I must confess I’m not checking all those boxes, and if I spent less time online, writing, teaching, and organizing, and more time on the basics of my business, I’m sure I’d do even better.

But that’s incidental. The point here is that the “never mind the quality feel the width” rationalization for the price of type is self-defeating for the independent foundry. It works for the big guys, because it’s in their interests to commoditize font design as a mass market “giveaway”, amortizing production costs against huge volumes.

But when the sales for a typeface are counted in dozens, which is, I would hazard, a typical average for independent foundries, any user who licenses a hot new indie doozy is getting a pretty damn exclusive product, so price shouldn’t be an issue, not just because it’s f****** brilliant, but because they will also be able to cock a snoot at their bundled-font-stricken peers and say, with apologies for unprofessional behavior, (short version):

“Stuff your H********, losers!”

Hmmm, okay so let’s try this again with another example.

A Mercedes Benz will still keep its value better than a Ford, but most of the perceived value is in design and – of course – prestige.

This is a great example and I’ll elaborate on that. A Mercedes is MUCH more expensive than a Ford. Now, all designers do not have the same standard of living. Some designers can afford a Mercedes and others can afford to drive a Ford. The car industry recognizes the need to address economic status. The point is EVERY graphic designer HAS to use fonts but every car consumer does not have to use a Mercedes Benz. There are rich designers, and struggling designers. I don’t see why that’s not a valid concern. It doesn’t seem fair to force all designers to buy a Mercedes when some are eating Ramen noodles. As long as there are struggling freelance designers around, a type foundry is never going to win an argument with that comparison. My reality is as a struggling designer and a recent design grad I’m usually the person who has to explain “type ethics” to my peers.

Another way to approach this is if we treat type as software, than what is the difference between say Adobe Creative Suite and a type family? Adobe still sells all of the programs individually and as a bundle. Why can’t type be the same way?

The font package Erik suggested previously is something I think more foundries should take advantage of, that is definitely a smart business move. Making a foundry appear approachable is definitely an attribute.

Terry, there are cheaper cars and more expensive cars—but there are no free cars (and if you find some, please drop me a line… ;-D ). However, fonts are another story… There are free fonts that are of good quality. There are also fonts that cost just $21, and some that cost thousands.

One thing that many designers are saying here that I’d like to reiterate is that graphic designers should not always be covering licensing costs on their own; they should be adding these into client billing. Of course, this isn’t going to work for a $60 project, but not every project is that small, even for low-budget freelancers. Graphic design software is much more expensive to license than fonts (even if you get it all at student rates—which are available from many foundries, too, BTW), but most designers who want to stay away from illegal software manage to find room in their budgets for these.

Also, I’d like to “third” Erik and James’ excellent suggestion of building relationships with type foundries. Every type foundry knows what is going on in the graphic design industry (the foundries that didn’t understand how design works have gone bankrupt…). While not every foundry is as flexible with designers as I’d desire, enough of them are that it shouldn’t present any real problems for graphic designers who want to pay for all the fonts they end of using in client work (see Erik’s thread above). Every foundry is, after all, just a phone call or e-mail away, and most businesses do tend to want to hear from their customers. What have you got to loose?

Making a foundry appear approachable is definitely an attribute.

Terry, I’d like to ask you about this idea of yours, too. What would you recommend that foundries do? (Aside from coming online, attending conferences, building contacts, distribution free material, etc, all of which is a good start, but not enough…)

>Making a foundry appear approachable

Approachable yes, but as Erik said, if you’re a type buyer and you’d like to get special treatment such as font samples for use in assessment and comps, you need a record of paying for licensing. That seems to me like a reasonable working relationship/deal: license some fonts from a foundry and they’ll be happy to give you some more to try out.

I’m happy to do that, but if someone I don’t know emails me out of the blue and asks me to set a few trade names for them in one of my typefaces and send them a PDF (it happpened a couple of days ago), I will politely direct them to Veer’s “Flont”. But if they were a past customer, I’d send them the font.

Terry, there are cheaper cars and more expensive cars—but there are no free cars

I agree. I’m certainly not arguing that type doesn’t have value. I’m arguing that people don’t understand what that value is when they perceive type to already be free. I have no problem buying fonts. However, I would like to have the option to buy TWO WEIGHTS of a typeface as needed because I cannot afford to buy an entire family for $200-$500. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable request. If that need isn’t addressed, many people will continue to feel put off by type foundries.

Terry, I’d like to ask you about this idea of yours, too. What would you recommend that foundries do?

This argument always happens amongst type designers and graphic designers. One thing that I think might eleviate some of the tension is to embrace both aspects of design. Type design IS graphic design. The fact that AIGA wasn’t involved in TypeCon shows me the turf wars that exist bewteen the two camps.

I think type foundries should position themselves as “SOFTWARE distributors”. Understanding type as concrete and tangible is something that will go a long way towards educating the consumer. We can’t put a digital file transfer in our hands, but we can put a box or a book there.

I think type foundries should position themselves as “SOFTWARE distributors”. Understanding type as concrete and tangible is something that will go a long way towards educating the consumer. We can’t put a digital file transfer in our hands, but we can put a box or a book there.

Terry, this is what (digital) type foundries are required to do, particularly in the States. US copyright laws have not evolved to cover the actual artwork of a typeface design. The only thing that is legally protected is the “font software” and only in terms of the software’s use. Any legally drafted EULA begins with this premise.

But software is not a tangible thing to fileswappers who do not comprehend how it is made or who makes it. I think the important thing to remember in this argument is the personal connection that everyone is coming around to discussing.

Type designers need to position themselves as the source of the artwork contained in the font software. They need to do this between themselves and their distributors as well as with the end users. I would love nothing more than to get up on my soapbox to condemn “The Machine” for sucking all the humanity out of the distribution process, but I see a massive shift already in progress coming from the grassroots.

Now, there is a direct correlation between Lauren’s (engelhardt) uphill battle among her backwards-somersaulting peers and her awareness and willingness to hit typophile.com for our side of the situation. She knows that we are real people and she can perhaps put the names to the faces (Yes, an obligatory type pun is in there somewhere.) If the rest of her group were aware of this very forum and this discussion and our passion and our contributions to their designer resources, they might begin to understand the value of what we provide. After that, they might even pay money for it!

And yes, it is about VALUE. Not of the software or the typeface or the OTF conveniences or the labor hours, but the value of the type designer’s ability and decision to share all these things.

And you know what else?

http://www.typeright.org

It should have been on page one of this thread... silly of us all to forget.

Silas,
I didn’t know about “Typeright” before. Thanks for the link.

ChrisL

PS: I quite enjoyed your “obligatory” pun :-)

You might ask these people how much A MONTH they pay for a cell phone, and how much of LASTING VALUE they get for that money.

Too many analogies already in this thread. I can’t put cell phones into the mix.

Designers just have to budget. We would all like to have every font at our disposal, but if we want good type available we have to act as the sales force for the type community, and police ourselves at the same time.

We are all in this together.

Quoting Silas:
If the rest of her group were aware of this very forum and this discussion and our passion and our contributions to their designer resources, they might begin to understand the value of what we provide. After that, they might even pay money for it!

Eh, I doubt it. I’ve done my best to be an advocate for the cause and now I’m just getting mocked for being a youthful idealist. I am so frustrated that I’m about ready to throw my hands up and walk away. (Honestly, why would I want to be part of a group that apparently doesn’t understand, respect and value their own industry?)

These designers seemingly refuse to see the correlation between their own ’starving artist’ status as freelancers and the similar plight of type designers. They just keep resorting to the argument that their clients won’t pay up for something they (the clients) fail to see as a valued commodity (type). And the designers don’t have enough cash to buy the fonts themselves, so work-arounds (system fonts, freebie sites and occasionally pirated fonts) are their solution.

For those curious, here is our discussion, which I’ve mirrored in a different location and scrubbed of real identities to protect those involved. But I felt it was appropriate to show what I’m up against here though I didn’t want to ’out’ these designers unfairly.

TypeRight is the Terry Schiavo of the font world.

hhp

Thanks Hrant.

ChrisL

> For those curious, here is our discussion....

Let’s see what Designer 1 said:

“Designer 1
How much does it cost to make a font?
Many standby fonts are in the public domain, Garamond, Caslon, Berthold, etc. were made hundreds of years ago. It’s 100% legal to scan them into a computer, open them in Fontographer, and create a new version of them.
I’ve dabbled with font creation, but not with adding kerning hints, though it doesn’t seem like it would be excessively hard.
The question becomes, if Caslon, for instance, only took 20 hours to turn into a new, good quality font, you wouldn’t need to charge much to make some decent money from it. I’d think you could make a decent business out of just making new versions of public domain fonts, and selling them for much less than Adobe.
(researching it, Caslon does sell for as low as $20 or so for an individual font, though you’d need to buy several of them to really use it)
If this is the case, why hasn’t someone done it, and/or why are the big type houses still charging so much?”

what I really like:
1. kerning hints
2. if Caslon, for instance, only took 20 hours to turn into a new, good quality font

> These designers.....

Sorry. They are not designers. To design with freebie & pirated fonts? Too sad.

BTW, I’d love to see samples — the great design with freebie fonts..... and Designer 1 - please post your font....

>the correlation between their own ‘starving artist’ status as freelancers and the similar plight of type designers.

A lack of solidarity.
Designers do get together in organizations like AIGA, RGD, but not a majority.
Does AIGA have specific references to software piracy in its ethics regulation?

Lauren, here are some facts that may help put things into perspective for your friends:

Yes, there are some people who make a living making fonts, but nobody’s getting rich off it. For most people who do it, it does not pay enough to quit their day job. Most font designers do something else to pay the bills. When you steal fonts, quite often you are stealing from people who are unable to make a living at it. This is actually the main reason why it is difficult to make a living making fonts.

Most free fonts are made by amateurs and dabblers. The reason they give them away is because they know the fonts are not professional quality and have not expended much effort on them. They correctly believe that no one would pay good money for them. Plus, by giving the fonts away, they feel they are off the hook if the fonts don’t work properly. If you give it away, you don’t have to take responsibility.

It is possible to make a mediocre font in 20 hours, but not a good quality one, even from an existing design. And it takes a considerable amount of experience even to make a mediocre font in such a short time. (Except maybe a grunge font.)

A popular font might sell 500 licenses in a year. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are over 200,000 graphic designers in the U.S.

The fact is, since the advent of digital type, the font business relies purely on the good will and trustworthiness of people who buy fonts. A whole industry based on the honor system, if you like. It’s amazing—and reassuring—that anyone can make money at it at all.

Quoting Nick Shinn:
A lack of solidarity.
Designers do get together in organizations like AIGA, RGD, but not a majority.
Does AIGA have specific references to software piracy in its ethics regulation?

I agree whole-heartedly.

And yes, AIGA addresses the ethics issue, specifically in regard to font usage in their Design Business and Ethics Series.

But do I even need to point out that designers who quibble over the price of a font are certainly not going to fork over the high membership fees to the AIGA?

The concept of big bucks type houses is long dead. It is easy to assume that there are type czars out there making a fortune from remakes of classic fonts. Type designers only get 20% of the sale anyway. Yes, Claude and William are long dead but they didn’t even dream of the functionality of the OTF pro fonts available today. Most classic fonts have very good revivals bundled with design software. The cost for the fonts is marked up in to the cost of the software suite. It SEEMS free but it isn’t. There is no wealthy type designers who have made their money from their type designs. If they have money, it came from something or someone else. Type designers make LESS money as a group that graphic designers. Sure, there are a few stars out there but they are not even close to Fortune 500 stuff. Type designers are not “The Man”, not some abstract wealthy gluttonous behemoth that can be pointed to as the enemy. Anyone who undertakes a career in type design does not do it for the money. If that were the reason, there wouldn’t have been a new type designer in generations.
To those who think there clients don’t care what the fonts look like, use the free stuff every time but don’t steal someone’s work and then give it away.
To those who think they can make a functional copy of Caslon or Garamond by scanning and tracing in 20 hours, be my guest—and by all means use it in all your work. You and your clients deserve each-other. In 20 hours, you will have a piece of crap.
If you don’t value type and your clients don’t value type, then why do you steal it? People steal it because they know it has value. There are places on this earth where people commit murder without retribution. Does that mean those lives have no value? Does that mean murder is not a crime? Does that mean if we placed less value on life that there would be fewer murders?
Stealing is stealing. Don’t pretend it is OK just because you don’t get caught.
ChrisL

The lack of preceived value of type is ignorance. Ingnorance isn’t bad if you know you are ignorant. I’m a learning bird watcher and I now know what a Black Throated Blue Warbler is. I was ignorant to what it looked like and what it acted like, but I was willing to learn. I think too many people with computers don’t have a clue what type is or that it was even designed. I think the type community has a large educational job in front of them to educate not just the designers and ad agency types, but John Q. Public as well. It will not happen by wishing or law suits. You ladies and gentlemen have to get your articles published not only in the New York Times but also in the New York Post (a Murdock paper).

Dan has hit it. It’s all about ignorance. If graphic designers have such disregard for the value of type, what kind of consideration can we expect from Joe Public? If graphic designers think all the type designers are dead and type is all pirated anyway, then there’s a huge disconnect between how type gets made and how people understand type. How to inform this new population? Definitely look for popular venues for publicity and journalism. But can we agree on the message?

Type design is highly skilled, laborious, creative, specialized work that has never earned the kind of returns that other careers do. Type design requires a unique temperament, highly trained visual acuity, historical awareness, and is invisible to the general public. No type designer, living or dead, built any kind of wealth simply designing type for retail sale. The type designers who have a modicum of “fame” are also not wealthy. Inferring they are, from any popularity they have is ignorance as well. The people that can sustain careers in type do so with custom work that pays off all at once. This is not an opinion, perspective, delusion, or personal position, it’s reality. I’m in the type industry and I know.

It’s pointless to argue the real value of type in dollars, the point is nobody arguing even understands where type comes from.We can go in circles all year with this. Graphic designers obviously need some frame of reference for how good type comes into existence. I’ve wished for a long time for a high-profile documentary about the making of a typeface, and preferably one with a respectful or interested tone. The New York Times is barely a step above the Onion in its pervasive disdain for type. The attitude influences the readership and nobody learns anything. Sound bytes are useless if we want the general public to understand what goes into making high-quality type. The entire process needs to be explained and illustrated. Documentarians?.... Great new subject here!

>The entire process needs to be explained and illustrated.

The best place to do that is in design school. Every design school should have type design as part of the curriculum — it’s a great way of providing insight into typography, which is still the core of the profession. In the educational context, designing a typeface is also a “pure research” project (whereas most design projects are simulations of real world practice), so it gives breadth to a design education.

Every design school should have type design as part of the curriculum

This is unfortunately not a universal view among graphic design professors. In fact, many of them here in Germany see such an assignment as an unnecessary relic from the HfG Ulm days (which was when many of them were in design school). Some of them even see calls for type design in the curriculum as being self-serving attempts by type designers looking for [more] work.

The concept of big bucks type houses is long dead. It is easy to assume that there are type czars out there making a fortune from remakes of classic fonts. Type designers only get 20% of the sale anyway.

As a occasional purchaser I have to say I am surprised at such a low percentage. Isn’t this a major part of the problem?

Lauren,
I think You should get new and better friends.

ƒ

“As a occasional purchaser I have to say I am surprised at such a low percentage. Isn’t this a major part of the problem?”

Elliot,
Read Eric’s comments further up in this thread where he explains the costs foundries have in the process. Everyone has costs and wants to make a living too.

There are a few fonts which sell well and others that don’t. Foundries use their best judgment to sell what they think has a market but they are not always right and have to eat the cost of the initial release. Sometimes, a font may not become popular until years later when it is “discovered” by some hot new design firm.

The point is that fonts are really cheap but no one believes it. Fonts have value but few are willing to pay for it. Thieves steal fonts and rationalize their actions by saying “everyone does it.”

I don’t think you have to teach a course in type design at every design school. It should be enough to have a guest lecturer come once a year and give a presentation to the students. I don’t mean where someone comes in and just shows their finished work but where they actually present the process. For a start, it might be nice to have a book written which might serve as a reference. I know there are plenty of books on type out there but I don’t know of any which would work for this purpose. It may best work with a collection of type designers each doing a chapter.

I can’t imagine major media printing articles on type design. There would not be enough perceived interest from their audience.
Graphic Designers are the gate keepers to type. We have to educate them and keep a dialogue going with them. ( I guess that is why I talk to myself—I am both us and them.)

ChrisL

>calls for type design in the curriculum as being self-serving attempts by type designers looking for [more] work.

Actually, my master plan is to influence generations of students who have studied under me to “buy into” my theories of typography, and, years later, when they graduate and move into positions where they can influence type purchasing decisions, they will of course choose Shinn-o-fonts*, and I will be a wealthy retiree.

*Unless they are running their own type foundries.

> Some of them even see calls for type design in the curriculum as being
> self-serving attempts by type designers looking for [more] work.

As opposed to their own selfless pursuits of course. Designing packaging for electronic gimmicks, and certainly magazine ads for SUVs does after all save lives.

hhp

I’m teaching an undergraduate course in Type Design at Parsons. Last semester was the first offering and I’m halfway through the second semester. In a 15 week semester a student is required to create a complete latin script font with a fairly extensive diacritical component that includes at least one OpenType feature. All of the students regardless of what their final font actually looks like come away with a very deep appreciation of the work type designers do.

At the beginning of the semester I told them that they had absolutely no idea how much work they were going to have to do in order to get the result I wanted. At first they didn’t believe me, but as the mid-term came around and they saw how little they had accomplished in those first seven weeks, the panic was exquisite.

Every one finished (with a week or two extension) and some of the stuff is actually not bad. A few of them are polishing their designs up for some sort of commercial release.

I have told my chairman that I think the course should be a requirement. He agrees, but current limitations to the schedule make it something for the future.

> In a 15 week semester a student is required to create a complete
> latin script font with a fairly extensive diacritical component
> that includes at least one OpenType feature.

Wow.

1) How many hours per week is the class?
2) How much time are they expected to spend outside of class, and how much do you think they actually do?
3) What pre-requisites to get in?

hhp

Does “latin script” mean a script design, or just any font that uses Latin characters? Either way, sounds really great!

Sounds like a great course James. I wish there had been something like that available in the Dark Ages when I went to design school. How much intrest is showng in your class? You have not had enough time for the “word-of-mouth” effect but I wonder if you will generate a broad base of interested students. [Maybe that “Font in 20 hours” guy will take your course and show you how it is done:-)]

Good work James! Now if we can get someone like you at every design school?

ChrisL

Or a script font with Latin serifs? Ouch. ;-)

hhp

I know designers who went to school in the seventies who, as part of the graphic design curriculum, had to draw a typeface design. That was the case with the first “font” I designed.

The class meets 2:40 once a week. I expect they work at least 8-10 hours a week outside of class at a minimum. You can tell the ones that do and the ones that don’t. I told them it should be a six credt course, but they only get 3. Latin script means latin script as opposed to cyrillic or arabic scripts. It is strongly recommended that they have taken Digital Lettering which is a sophomore elective that both Peter Bain and I teach, but it is not a pre-requisite. The ones that have taken the Digital Lettering do better than those who do not. The class size is limited to 15. Last semester I had 10, this semester there are 14.

There is education and education, classroom work for students is one thing, but educating both designers, ad agencies and John Q. Public is another. James get your articles about your type designs in papers that aren’t main stream. Maybe there should be an online site with articles written about how the type designs were created that is connected to a home page site like AOL. 15 educated people don’t stop type licencing abuse. This can’t be approached as “one at a time” it has to be more like what the national political parties do. Make it a nation/worldwide campaign.

Mark,
I went to design school in the 60’s. We developed “alphabets” using paint and brush. I can’t say it was a complete typeface. In those days, that would have been well over the 20-hour mark :-) We also did caligraphy and carved Roman capitals into hardened clay. We even had a hot metal type shop put together by Jack Staufagher so typography was covered at least in the old-school way.

ChrisL

TypeRight is the Terry Schiavo of the font world.

Is that cynicism, Hrant?

Cynicism? No, it’s pretty factual.
1) Not a peep has come out of them since about 1999.
2) One of their founding members has gone into hiding, owing people refunds for a magazine that never materialized.

hhp

“Make it a nation/worldwide campaign”

Got some connections at Time/Warner who want to blow the lid off this puppy?

I think it’s very useful for design schools to offer this kind of class. James is on the front lines of keeping this awareness from becoming completely insular, invisible and irrelevant to the general public. Please don’t belittle that work. If every design school required a type design class, it would have several effects including: All those design grads would come away with a personal experience of how valuable type is, and each of them would have had the opportunity to be exposed to something very obscure, which they might go on to explore more deeply. All those people are then equipped to negotiate fair compensation for type products, and are more likely to license them legally. Their experience can influence others in their studios. If that happens each year from 2005 on, we’ll be on our way to some more general awareness.

I don’t say we shouldn’t have mass media paying attention to type; see my previous post. But everyone is in a different position to have an influence. I also think there’s a limit to the completeness of any message delivered to the average reader through general media. How can we be sure the complete message will make it through the editorial mill? Would an editor at a major magazine be willing to devote pages and pages to digital typefounding if Paris Hilton had just thrown a candy wrapper away? Cut that boring type story and put Paris on Page 1! Get me photos!

I think we’ve all joked about reality type shows, but joking aside, is there a channel or network that might be interested in a 43-minute doc about the process of making a typeface? Is there a documentary filmmaker who thinks it’s worth pursuing? Imagine a camera crew following Christian Schwartz around to press checks and design meetings, and watching laser proofs come out. Exciting stuff! Matthew Carter has compared it to watching a refrigerator make ice. Could it be made watchable?

If you don’t value type and your clients don’t value type, then why do you steal it? People steal it because they know it has value.

I just wanted to make sure that this comment from Chris didn’t get lost in the shuffle. It pretty much says it to me.

dezcom-
Have you been hanging out in East St. Louis bars? Was that you who spilled his tequila sunrise on the spec sheets I was trying to impress the barmaid with?

If there’s one thing that’s almost impossible to do, it’s to teach Visigoths to just BE CAREFUL. And clients — JUST PAY FOR WHAT YOU WANT. I think I told the story here already about my bid on a logo design for a fairly large St. Louis company. After hearing my bid, the owner scoffed, “My nephew has a computer — he’ll do it for $50!”

How do we prove or demonstrate the VALUE of type? Until this question is answered the debate will never end. Getting the consumer to understand the VALUE of type is where I think the answer is.

And I thought we graphic designers had it tough educating clients and the public about the worth of our services!

A common underlying theme thoughout all of this discussion is the new(ish), digital nature of type design and font construction. The digital age has done similar things to music and graphic design.

It is not just pirating, but the fact that our raw materials are not so raw anymore. Programmers use code snippets, musicians use samples and sound bites, graphic designers use clipart (and free fonts). Yes the work is completed quicker, but that has become the expectation as well, and the perceived value is also lower. “You just push some buttons and it’s done - right?”

The craft of these things is being slowly (actually, quickly) eroded in favour of speed of deployment and just-in-time delivery.

—pd—

“Have you been hanging out in East St. Louis bars? Was that you who spilled his tequila sunrise on the spec sheets I was trying to impress the barmaid with?”

LOL!!! No Chuck, I haven’t been to East St Louis in 25 years. I was on a press check there long ago. The printing plant had 2 rows of barbed wire fence with nasty looking Dobermans standing guard between them. I didn’t wander off in to any neighborhood bars. I am sure the barmaid you were trying to impress was tougher than I am :-)

ChrisL

Although I agree that adding type design to a graphic designer’s formal education would be beneficial, it would not be easy to implement for many schools. The number of type designers that exist is small, the number that excel even smaller, and the number that want to teach even smaller still.

Exposure is the key. If we can’t get in on an official level, there needs to be student run groups/meetings, and central website with writings, links, excercises. Would need a student leader, etc... Critiques only for ’advanced’ students?

Eric, we formed something similar in Offenbach last year, TypeOff.

Perhaps what is needed is a “How to Broaden Your Knowledge of Typography—The grass roots way” package of materials which can be given to potential type zealot students and or design faculty. Maybe what Dan started in Offenbach would be a good starting point?

ChrisL

The best way to further an understanding of type is to, um, to teach-study-practice typography.

It means dialogue and debate on necessary teaching among design faculty. It means client and professional education and outreach. It means anything that pushes the bar up, and makes a older designer have to admit they never understood exactly why the Univers and Helvetica people couldn’t just agree. It means not discriminating against handlettering and calligraphy, when taught and practiced at a sophisticated level, because they can imprint history, form and sensitivity without having to make typefaces. It means worshipping the masters with a few choice words behind their back and pointing out the foibles when you find them.

I can’t think of one fresh, concrete, reasonable proposal that hasn’t been made before. Rather, the job is to actually pursue one.