Bodoni 26
http://www.p22.com/Lanston/products/Bodoni_26.html

Eidetic Neo Omni and Filosofia Unicase, but my favourite is Garreth Hague's delightful Perla

I'm a huge fan of Alphabet 26. I wish it would be released digitally, so the rest of us can enjoy it's beauty.. But I guess for now all I do admire it from afar.

andré baldinger's newut

http://www.ambplus.com/pa/2.html

> I’m a huge fan of Alphabet 26.

Why?

hhp

I thought what Thompson did was find a typeface where the small caps had the same height as the lower case x-height, and similar weight, which just happened to be Baskerville. So anyone can do what he did, Claes.

I took the idea a step further with Panoptica, making it monowidth as well as unicase. Why? for concrete poetry.

> Why?

it's pretty?

and i've always had a thing for unicase fonts. Alphabet 26 may not be some revolutionizing design, but i still think it kicks most unicase fonts' asses.

> I thought what Thompson did was find a typeface where ...

And I thought he redrew things.

> it’s pretty?

Oh.
Like that Hollywood bimbo - what's her name again?... ;-)

But Panoptica, I like. Why? Maybe mostly
because it's a system, and I like systems.

hhp

Panoptica is nice because it stays with the "rules" of unicase, unlike many so-called unicase fonts (several of which have been linked from this thread).

> the “rules” of unicase

I actually think of unicase as being pretty free-form*. One of my students is working on a unicase font** and she's using either the UC or lc form (or a hybrid) depending on what works better for her particular design (a uniheight stencil face) not any inherited "external" rules.

* And I suspect Nick agrees.

** A strategy I actually encouraged her to consider, although not because it's "hip", but because it made structural sense.

hhp

I love those kinds of fonts for their whimsical feel and your alphabet is very nice but, it is unlikely to catch on as a standard, since I've read that reading shapes of words created by the ascenders and descenders allow people to read faster. (or do the experts here feel differently?)

I actually think of unicase as being pretty free-form*. One of my students is working on a unicase font** and she’s using either the UC or lc form (or a hybrid) depending on what works better for her particular design (a uniheight stencil face) not any inherited “external” rules.

* And I suspect Nick agrees.

** A strategy I actually encouraged her to consider, although not because it’s “hip”, but because it made structural sense.

well, there aren't any set rules, of course, but i personally feel that not every uppercase and particularly lowercase letter fits in a unicase setting. looking at Perla, linked above, i just cringe when i see those lowercase t's and r's. but it's all a matter of personal taste and opinion, i suppose.. and maybe i just have a more strict idea of what a true unicase typeface should look like.

the by far worse unicase type i've seen in wide use is the absolute hackjob that McDonald's in Sweden uses all over the place. this is an enormous company, certainly with a more than average budget for advertising and they end up with something like this? it's embarrassing just to look at.

Although I designed Bodoni 26, or, (at least made it function under the Bradbury concept), I wish I had been to Finland first. The Ramsay Stones have legitimacy where the Bradbury concept does not. The rusults are charming however. (Ncks happy accident theory!)

The Ramsay Stones in Finland have typographical legitimacy.

http://www.p22.com/Lanston/Giampa/GiampaWonders.html

> Although I designed Bodoni 26,

I knew there was a *sick* version of that style I had seen somewhere.
Thanks for the link.

Note: Sick is the new word for *cool* around here.
: )

Here are some in this style that I like by Manfred Klein:
Bradbury's Shadow:

http://www.fontplay.com/images/bradburyshadow.jpg

Mono Mouse:

http://www.fontplay.com/images/monomous.jpg

Artist:

http://www.fontplay.com/images/artist.jpg

By Dasklem/Zone Erogene
C Dans Lair:

http://www.fontplay.com/images/cdanslairface.jpg

Arriérre Garde:

http://www.fontplay.com/images/arrieregarde.jpg

* And I suspect Nick agrees.

Yes. When I was teaching the "design a unicase" course, my students came up with all kinds of sick stuff. And once you throw ascenders and descenders into the mix... disturbance.

However, Brad Thompson was on to something with his particular bi-form configuration, which has become somewhat of a convention.

Bayer's 1925 Universal Alphabet is kind of opposite, in that it substitutes a few Uppercase forms into the lower case, and he probably thought it was supremely logical, but it was never made into a font, and never caught on, whereas BT's idea rapidly spawned many biform fonts in 1950s typositor land.

> Brad Thompson was on to something

More like he was on something: a high, thinking
he was addressing his son's reading problem...

> Bayer’s 1925 Universal Alphabet is kind of opposite

In a way, but a better opposant to Bayer was Cassandre: he -somewhat rightly- thought that the lc had a mottled heritage, and decided to "trickle down" the UC to the lc. And Cassandre enjoyed a pragmatism (check out the "d" in Peigot) that the gridnicks didn't.

> it was never made into a font

Hasn't The Foundry done it?
As have some starry-eyed neophyte reductionists, I'm sure.

hhp

a better opposant to Bayer was Cassandre

Good point. AMC was in a class of his own.

Hasn’t The Foundry done it?

Right. I meant at the time Bayer came up with it, which is surprising, as he envisioned it for writing and typewriters as well, but no-one took the ball and ran with it. Hmm, maybe there were some versions in the '50s, '60s, Bodoni-ish?

> I took the idea a step further with Panoptica, making it monowidth as well as
> unicase. Why? for concrete poetry.

I just stumbled across this and thought it is a great idea that there is a script version. Very nice.

In 1950, this was an interesting idea. Now though, I feel loathed to entertain the concept as a genuine attempt at improving letter recognition and consequently the ease of reading. It seems less rationalising the process of reading, than the superficial shapes of characters, and nowadays we know better, and appreciate the functional value of varied character shapes / impact of desc/ascenders etc. Not to forget of course, how the sudden upheavel of old and familiar methods can cause more damage than it's worth.

The only value I see in this is the public's intrigue for it as display. Not to say that can't be an admirable thing itself however, but as for it improving our language system, do me a favour.

> the sudden upheavel of old and familiar methods...

...Is getting to be the status quo. But this style does have the quality of having a "wacky" feel while retaining as much neatness as someone cares to put into it. I love these fonts.

Not to mention without having all those nasty desc/ascenders to get in the way of line spacing.

Morse Code is even easier to linespace.

hhp

>> But this style does have the quality of having a “wacky” feel while retaining as much neatness as someone cares to put into it.

exactly -- all style.

exactly — all style.

Not at all. Panoptica was designed for constraints-based concrete poetry where part of the effect of the poem is the visual shape it makes. Shaped verse, depending on a monowidth font. Now, whatever the merits of that idea, I approached the task of designing a monowidth typeface for it strictly on the premise of improving text colour, because monowidth fonts produce very lumpy colour. It occurred to me that combining monowidth with the Alphabet 26 unicase scheme would be one way to do that.

It's not a question of unicase looking "wacky", but a question of how it's used. Sure, an unusual font will look wacky if it's dropped into a generic tombstone layout. But the point of creative typographic design, going beyond easy rote cliches, is to create a concept and execution (layout, typography, illustration, etc.) where everything works together as a seamless, synergistic whole, and no component stands out above the overall message. So, find the layout that fits the face, or vice versa.

> I approached the task of designing a monowidth typeface
> for it strictly on the premise of improving text colour

Not a bad premise - and not a minor challenge! But a unicase
font is still mannered* enough (fonts are defined by much more
than their usage) that its use will be severely limited, and even
an exceptionally even color will not make up for that.

* A refined way of saying "wacky". :-)

hhp

Right Hrant, it's a specialty niche.

But the alphabet continues to evolve.
For instance, the "tailed" lower-case l from Meta has found its way into a lot of sans fonts, as has the serifed upper case I of Bell Centennial, to the extent that they don't look mannered any more.
The single story g, originally an italic concept, spread to the sans serif roman, after Akzidenz Grotesk.
The alphabetic evolution of the original Petrine Cyrillic capital D went from a triangle to (almost) a square.

>the “tailed” lower-case l from Meta

This was in Johnston's Underground typeface, so it is a long time around. I don't know how much it had an influence before Meta.

> the alphabet continues to evolve.

And I'm the biggest fan of that. But:
1) There's a difference between style, and even structure, versus things like only having one case: unicase fonts can't fully convey [written] language*; so the language would have to evolve (in this case some would call it devolve...) for unicase to really work beyond the realm of style.
2) Making fonts for the distant future is hazardous. :-)

* Except for a Latinate script that's monocase. Is there one?

hhp

Nick, I was commenting generally on unicase fonts and not specifically panoptica. As it happens, I very much like this work, both concept and execution. I'm sure typographers will have fun using it, but one still can't delude themselves with bradbury's theory and it's inherent readability issues. Dare I say BT's romanticism befits panoptica's nature.

I don't have anything against the forms in the least in an appropriate setting, just not the myopic idea around them.

I'm not one to deny the evolution of language and writing systems, but let's face it: baby steps.

In going through some of Manfred's older fonts I just came across this one.

Used with a photo I took in Newport Beach:

I use this thread for reference and wanted to add Cafe Rojo as an instance.

http://www.abstractfonts.com/font/11083

Another interesting one: Mary Jane Tankard by Apostrophe

Another: http://www.psyops.com/html/spec_armchair.html

And ... one more comment for this topic:

Alphabet 26 - as well as a zillion other things - was inspiration for my 2009 release, Jeanne Moderno; which is sort of a unicase, but not exactly:

http://new.myfonts.com/fonts/steve-mehallo/jeanne-moderno/

:)

steve mehallo
tinyurl.com/mehallofonts
mehallo.com

I just reread this thread, and can't believe how polite Hrant and I were to one another!