Reading MA Typeface design 2009 typefaces now online!

clauses's picture

Dear Typophiles, I proudly present you this years typeface designs from the students of University of Reading's MA in Typeface design. You will find links to PDF specimens and 'Reflection on Practice' essays.

http://www.typefacedesign.org/2009/

There you will also find updated pages for the years 2000-08

Kind regards,
Claus Eggers Sørensen
MATD class of 2008-09

ebensorkin's picture

The idea there was was that you can see the effect of the double f not just in ff but also in ffi & ffl. I will change it to show the other special possibilities f+f= ff ( + ffb, ffh, ffi, ffj, ffk and ffl ) It may well be that there is a better way to express this idea though.

neverblink's picture

It wasn't clear to me that, that was what you were trying to say. I think what was throwing me off, was the f+l = fl together with the f+f+l = ffl. That made me expect you would mention the fi/ffi in the same way.

ebensorkin's picture

I appreciate your saying so! That makes sense. I hope the next version seems more sensible to you. It should be up in a few days.

dojr2's picture

Pardon my ignorance but I am surprised by what I see. IMVHO, there are some basic mistakes in some of these fonts. Say, the spacing of 'capoeira' on the front page is simply wrong : the rounds are too loose, the i not spaced enough. I really like capoeira, guillotine, coline, anglaise and Enquire though. I am also self-teaching myself, so where am I wrong?

_Palatine_'s picture

Nick mentioned "asymmetrical serifs" as characteristic of a supposed Reading house-style. I agree that there seems to be a style that is characteristic of Reading MATD productions at large.

Would someone please be kind enough to give or show examples of these asymmetrical serifs?

I'm more or less familiar with the look of Reading productions like Cassius, Vesper, and Malabar.

Also would someone please explain why asymmetrical serifs are not necessarily a good thing?

Thanks!

dezcom's picture

"asymmetrical serifs...good thing?"

They are neither good nor bad. It is all in the execution. As the man said, the devil is in the details.

Michael Hernan's picture

@_Palatine_ There is a point where the serif becomes too long and there is also a point where the serif is too short [from the point of view of the designer]. This might be different on either side of the glyphs stem, considering the whole of the letter and what the composite elements of the glyph are doing. Sometimes a serif may need to be shortened in the inside of a letter (n) to avoid serifs from becoming too close, with a chance of touching, when printed, and therefore closing up the character. When there are more than 2 or 3 occurrences of shortening the serifs on the inside of the letter this might suggest a style to populate throughout the character-set. I don't remember being told this, but it just seems to make common sense.

I would have said this before... the course (any course) is a chance to try things out, why just do something boring and simple, try variety – experiment.

My font Pseudo considered serifs to be malleable like clay, where I could add a little or take away to give balance to the letter-forms.

John Hudson's picture

Chris: As the man said, the devil is in the details.

That man was wrong. God is in the details. The devil is a generalist.

dezcom's picture

LOL!!! But the alliteration sucks :-)

William Berkson's picture

I thought "God is in the details" was the original from Mies van der Rohe. But my friend Wiki, who seems to know everything, put me in the know:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Devil_is_in_the_details

.00's picture

God, devil, same thing.

Who sits at at the left hand of the Father?

_Palatine_'s picture

> Who sits at the left hand of the Father?

Eric Gill.

Because the Good Lord doesn't like a smartass. ;)

quadibloc's picture

I wouldn't consider myself qualified to comment on how good the Tamil graphics in Venkat are; I presume the students were asked to stretch themselves by designing a face for a language with which they were not familiar, and under the circumstances of a course such as this, there would hardly be the time to fully immerse oneself in the aesthetics of another culture.

Given that, as noted, these are exercises and not products, there is nothing wrong with that. (Devanagari, of course, is the script used for Sanskrit and Hindi, among other languages, but not Tamil or Malayalam... or Tibetan or Thai or Gujarati, even if these scripts are indeed closely related to Devanagari.)

Jongseong's picture

Perhaps relevant to the discussion of non-Latin (specifically Indic) typefaces in this thread, I am running a little experiment in the following thread:

http://typophile.com/node/67613

I have long suspected that those who don't read a script simply don't see the same things that a typographically attuned native reader sees. I've posted a sample of the hangul (Korean alphabet) of two fonts bundled with Windows, Arial Unicode and Gothic. The latter is a solid if dated design by an influential twentieth-century Korean type designer, while the former is a disaster; even Koreans who don't pay much attention to typography wonder why the Korean is displaying all weird when they come across web pages or applications that display hangul in Arial Unicode.

You non-Korean speakers are welcome to comment on how you think the two compare in the sample.

hrant's picture

Perhaps the instructors influence the students too much.

That is indeed a huge concern, but from what I've seen the Reading instructors try quite hard to avoid such overbearing influence (as all good teachers should).

You must've been thinking of the other school...
(Sorry to repurpose your negativity. :-)

hhp

Syndicate content Syndicate content