To me: the "h" is definitely too narrow (although I wouldn't make it the same width as the "n"), the "n" is fine, while the "u" is borderline. As for "y", that skewed thick arm does look funny, but ever since I saw it in that Deberny #17/#18* I've actually liked it. It seems to be a weight distribution scheme.

* http://www.themicrofoundry.com/other/Javal_18.gif
I'd make the "v" symmetrical however.

The spacing though seems a bit loose in spots (although apparently this design was considered tight for its era), but being metal makes it harder to space with consistent tightness.

hhp

> Was Jannet a lefty?

Dunno. This is the first time I'd ever even heard the guy's name.
But although this was a reaction against the "constructed" Didone trend, and a revival of a more chirographic past, it still looks "synthetic" to me (maybe because they couldn't stray too much from the spirit of that era), so I don't think they were "digitizing" any handwriting/calligraphy.

BTW, the caps are supposed to be how mid-19th century Frenchies thought the Romans were supposed to have wanted to mahe them... Hard to explain - you'd really have to read the Ovink article(s).

And yeah, I love that hefty apostrophe!

hhp

Hrant

You are right. That is a face that needs to be made available.

This is not a criticism, but the entire face seems to be on the condensed side, with the exception of the fullish caps; at least the two shown.

If the proof you included was initially 9 point or thereabouts, it seems to me that the set would be more than tight enough. I's be curious to see if the type's condensed (to my eye) feeling is evident at actual size.

Where did you find the showing? I don't think I have ever run across the name Jannet. I will need to take a dig in my pile books.

Thanks

Jim Rimmer

Well, its well know here! ;-) It follow the trend started by Perrin. The Jannet Italic is very very nice.

I gave that subject couple years ago to my type design students. They have done a strange but nice interpretation of it who give a completly different feeling in big size with its angular serifs but who still very round in small text size. Saddly no text showing online.

http://perso.ensad.fr/%7eensadtypo/fontes.html#jannet

What you mean by
"the elzevir stuff isn't really the same as Morris's."

For Ponot, Mandel and others, Perrin and Jannet are the first revival of Old Style typefaces, long long before Morris and others. Just that part of history generally don't appear on standard Anglo-US typography books.

For Perrin its pretty clear, as described by Ponot in its 2 books. He wanted typefaces who by its forms reflect old text he want to publish. 19th typefaces don't fitted well, so he tried to find old typefaces, and used one existing old italic, and designed a Roman lc to fit with. Its caps are already done to do the titling for his HUGE book on Roman Lyon Inscriptions. I describe the Italic as a pure Garalde, when the Roman is more an Incised Garalde, perhaps the first text face of the category at this time?

Perrin was one of the first typefaces revival done at the original ANCT (Imprimerie nationale), roughly 1987 by Jean Renaud Cuaz and Ronan Le Henaff under the direction of Mandel. Then, later later, the Imprimerie Nationale asked to Franck Jalleau, their in-house type designer to do a digital version who is used ONLY in the Ponot book you refer.

About Jannet, there is less stuff about it. Gerard unger refered to it several time, as a French "Gout Hollandois"!
I have here a couple of Biblioth

> French "Gout Hollandois"!

Funny!

hhp