I would love to use Fedra-sans -- But we are currently re-doing the ID for our firm, and using Fedra serif. so I think might be too close. But I love that face.

Well two plugs here,

Instead of the overused Trajan, use Dave Farey's La Gioconda, it based on Cresci's lettering and has a lowercase to boot
http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/letraset/la-gioconda/

For the sans I recommend Giacomo. Not only do both fonts have Italian names starting with G but they have a certain affinity for one another
http://www.terminaldesign.com/retail_specimen.php?ID=1176&viewFam=1

>

Contact me privately and I'll be happy to discuss it with you.

>

I think you can get by without the SC. I have mixed feelings about SC in sans faces. I will probably make Sc for Giacomo in the future, but with its large x-height, all caps setting may not be as intrusive as with other more traditionally proportioned types. But hey, if having SC in Giacomo will speed its adoption, I'll make SC for Giacomo!

>

The SC for Giacomo would be part of the OTF feature file, and when it is completed, it would be an upgrade for users. Hopefully I can have it done sometime in November. Perhaps sooner if the proper inducements materialize.

James, that's pretty good news about Giacomo SC :-). It's always keen to have non-Adobe-folks adopt the OTF-Pro-format (when Linotype et al seem to be content with just converting old fonts to OTF without using the pro features), and your typographic style on Giacomo and Clearview is, as I said, legible and clear and thus a solid alternative to other, more overused sans serif typefaces. So I sure hope you find the time to do some more OTF stuff :-D.

Giacomo's weights are not many, but they seem to be nice and close, which means you could fake smallcaps adequately. You know all about that, don't you Kyle? ;-)

hhp

>

> Giacomo's weights are not many,

6 weights are not many?

>

> Hmmm.. That hundred dollar difference might be the determaining factor > here (sorry James ).

$360 for 12 font OT family installable on up to 5 workstations. Comes out to $6 per font per computer. Would it be better if I gave it away?

Kyle: FedEx? Feel free to just use regular snailmail.

hhp

James' suggestion of La Gioconda reminds me of another Cresci-inspired typeface, Gerard Unger's Capitolium. It has a sans serif companion, Vesta, so might fit the bill perfectly for your job, Kyle.

>I know Meta was SO used for a while, but >it's "trend" status seems to have subsided a bit >of late. You might just take a look.

Same here. After years of not using Meta, I was verrry close to using it again on a job some days ago and found it quite pleasing, but still decided on FFInfo, as the job needed a bit of a more static and computer-like feel while still maintaining legibility. Still, you don't see Meta too often anymore, and the font itself is good work. We still could use a MetaLight, imo, though. And of course, full OpenType Treatment. Makes sense with all those foreign language sets already devbeloped at MetaDesign/FontShop.

And James... for a small foundry, Giacomo does come with a rather painful price tag attached. The OTF made me buy it, but still... prices like these are what keeps me from buying Bliss and a batch of Lineto Fonts. Your work is outstanding, and I'm all for paying the price a speicific work is worth, but when even works by Luc(as) de Groot and Fontshop are less expensive, it makes the decision to get your fonts a bit harder. A few Euro more and I could have bought the wonderful Taz III. And over at Chester's and Rick's you get the great section at 99$... now THAT is an incentive :-D.

Still, Giacomo is well worth the money spent (maybe the Upgrade can be for free, though, hinthintnudgenudgewinkwink...) Would've bought Clearview as well, but my money was all spent... we're finally moving into a larger house/bureau and I'm pretty broke after buying the whole thing.

Well billing, haha, thats a tricky subject.

In my case it is subjective.

With purchasing something like a type face, with some clients we would mark it up by 10-20%, with some clients that price might need to be burried within something else. Sometimes we might not even mark up for a type face, if it is something that we are basically bying to use once or twice on some client work and then keep for our own use later. I think realisticly you have to take things like this on a case by case basis.

I know some that would be fine with purchasing fonts. I know other thats would say, "What th hell? $360 for a font? Why didnt you just use something you had" and would then begin thinking that you are trying to cheat them in some way.

Like I said with us, we have decided that billing for things of this nature needs to be delt with on a client by client basis.
Were not the biggest firm, but we do have a good a good amount of people, and a modest sized client base.

This deserves it's own thread for sure James. I've seen two
approaches out there: the big agency model and the studio
model.

The big agencies buy the big libraries (like these)
and supplement as needed with single fonts from various
places.

The studio model is more like Kyle described:

a) If at all possible, pass the cost on to your client. This
means padding the project expenses when you write the
estimate, if you foresee having to buy type. This model is
standard for photography and illustration and can be for
fonts, especially if it's more of a specialty face that you will
have a hard time reusing in your studio.

b) If you can't justify passing the costs onto your client,
invest in faces you will be able to use later.