beautiful family indeed! the "poster" design is a fantastic display counterpart -- I hope I have an opportunity to use the whole group together!

I thought I should mention (again, in no commercialist push for Veer) that I really enjoyed the Brioso specimen in Veer's latest catalog. you guys really are doing some great work over there, Grant!

Adobe just might want to hand over its type marketing to the Veer team. There's a taste of irony in this, recalling the ImageClub > Adobe Studios > Eyewire > Getty saga.

Brioso immediately reminded me of dfType's textworthy, calligraphic Rialto. (Here's a TDC2002 specimen.)

Yes.
And I heard the same sentiment at ATypI-Rome. I wonder, is there a pattern emerging... :-/

hhp

There’s a taste of irony in this, recalling the ImageClub > Adobe Studios > Eyewire > Getty saga.

We're certainly nothing if not a persistent bunch...

I see how the Rialto comparison can be made but would point out the lowercase (roman) of each. They're very different. I'm guessing many people are referencing the similarities in the serifs (especially the caps) as they both have the non symmetrical serifs left by a pen. (which, by the way, I love) Anyhoo.

And yes, Veer are marketing mothers. Even my Dad gets their catalog.

I would like to make some comments about this face, but I'm wondering if it's appropriate for one type designer to criticize another's work.

Should we have professional solidarity?

Even my Dad gets their catalog.

I certainly hope he wants to get our catalog, and he's not just accepting that fact that it continually lands in his mailbox. If it's a nuisance, let me know. I'll take care it. After all, we're not just marketing mothers - we're marketing mothers that actually give a flip.

> Should we have professional solidarity?

Only when balanced against candor.

There's a line between solidarity and a mafia.

hhp

Just curious, what is the relationship between Adobe and Veer (formally)?
I know some stuff abouy Veer's background, but I'm curious where the backing for their current marketing spree is coming from.

...what is the relationship between Adobe and Veer?

Officially and simply, Veer is a reseller of Adobe type products. We also provide services for handling all of Adobe's typeface license extensions. We certainly have a wonderful relationship with Harold Grey at Adobe, which goes back to when we were part of Adobe and he was still humming around at Letraset and ITC. Other than that, we're completely self-propelled.

Grant -

The "marketing mothers" comment was purely a compliment. The materials look good and arrive consistenly. Not bad. And yes, he does want the catalog!

> candor

The text color of Brio is uneven (at least, in the 9 on 11 regular weight Veer sample, which is what these comments are based upon). The reason for this appears to be that the curved lowercase characters have an "italic" skew, which concentrates their weight bottom left and top right, close to the serifs of adjacent vertical stems. So a word like "commonly" is tight between the five combinations involving curved characters, but loose between the vertical strokes of m, n, and l.

An interesting concept, a typeface that's a mixture of roman and italic slope, but perhaps not here...

Also, look at the word "styles" - it's tight everywhere except for a big hole between t and y. It looks like the sidebearing on the right of the t is too wide (and too narrow on the left). For a calligraphic face, especially in OpenType, one would expect the crossbar of the t to ligature with the entry stroke of the y.

It's surprising Brio has an uneven color, because that's an area of type design where Robert Slimbach has done some very clever normative work, in Utopia - squarish lower case curves with ample sidebearings - and Myriad (with Carol Twombly) - kerned space-character combinations.

So the question is: Does Brio's irregular slope create a serious design flaw - uneven color - or is this just an aesthetic feature I happen to be biased against?

> is this just an aesthetic feature

It might even be a functional feature - I've come to believe that there is very much such a thing as too much even color*, although I still have no ideas where the threshold is. On the other hand, I'm not sure Slimbach is progressive enough to have done that on purpose. So I think it must be an aesthetic choice. Roughness is in fashion now - look at all that fauve Eastern European stuff that's all the rage. It could also be an attempt at introducing so-called human warmth into a typeface - but you guys already know what I think of chirographic type... :-)

* Look at Optima.

hhp

Nick --

I agree with you that the 9-point sample shown in the Veer catalog seems very uneven. I don't think that this is a function of the design aesthetic; I think it's just not fitted properly. I find this surprising, though, because Slimbach is notoriously fussy about fitting.

There are definitely some odd things going on in that sample. The 't' is a particularly bad offender, with the loose rsb and tight lsb. There's also something really weird going on with 'a' in some combinations.

It's curious to me that some of the combinations that look off in the text sample, do not appear that way in other place. For instance, look at the poor 'ti' fitting in 'tradition' or 'Latin' in the second line of the text, and then compare to the 'ti' combination in the large 'Optically Sophisticated' line where it seems perfectly fine.

Or compare the 'tion' combination in 'tradition' again with the same string in 'captions' in the third line of the lighter text below. The fitting in the light setting seems just fine. Similarly compare the beginning of 'typeface' in the first line of the top sample with 'type' at the beginning of the third line in the lower -- again, the lower sample seems well fitted, the top sample f*-ed up.

For the moment, I'm willing to give Slimbach the benefit of the doubt and question whether the composition in the top sample isn't screwing significantly with the fitting and causing the unevenness that you cite. I notice, for one thing, that hyphenation seems to have been disallowed and there are several obscenely gappy lines. The letterspacing may even be flexing here. I don't think the setting is doing the face any favors.

I suspect, however, that the design aesthetic of Brioso makes it perhaps more susceptible this kind of handling. I would think the same setting of something like Sabon would not show up as so obviously uneven.

I'm willing to suspend final judgment on Brioso until I've had a chance to see more examples.

-- K.

>There are definitely some odd things going on in that sample.

Must be the size: 9/11.

Nick, how do you mean it "must be the size"? Does that affect how characters connect or words are formed or look in anyway?

More specimens please.

Sorry, it was supposed to be a joke. As if Noam Chomsky's "9/11" was an essay on typography.

;)

On the other hand, size does in fact affect things majorly!

> As if Noam Chomsky’s “9/11” was an essay on typography.

:->

hhp

> Must be the size: 9/11

In actually fact, there is a bit of weirdness concerning the size of the sample in question. It was originally set as 9/11pt, but the entire design was scaled in InDesign by about 83% - therefore making the sample closer to 7.5/9pt. Additionally, we noticed after the fact that the two top blocks of copy had been set with InDesign's optical kerning option turned on by mistake. Changing the option back to use metrics kerning eliminates most of the issues discussed above.

> More specimens please.

I have posted another PDF to the Veer site comparing the two kerning settings on those copy blocks. The first page uses 'optical kerning', the second page uses 'metrics kerning'.

http://www.veer.com/download/pdf/brioso.pdf

Kent, I think I've kept the impressive "official" Brioso specimen from Rome - I'll check it out and report back. Also, isn't there a PDF on the Adobe site?

hhp

> isn?t there a PDF on the Adobe site?

That was partly the point of the original post -- there is not hide nor hair of Brioso anywhere to be found on the Adobe site.
Observe.

> the entire design was scaled in InDesign by about 83%

Did you scale an outlined version, or a "fonted" version? If you have optical spacing turned on, the former method would throw things off. Indy uses a "truncated bilinear" method: linear compensation between 4 and 12 points, another linear between 12 and 72, and flat above and below.

As for the integrity of Indy's optical spacing, I've found that it makes things better for 90% of the fonts out there, but a little worse for the best work. Also, it's probable that an "irregular" design like Brioso throws off the algorithm (since it's based at least in part on certain glyphic preconceptions).

--

Your PDF is very telling. I think in the case of the "t" for example it's possible that the rightmost vertex of the bar is being used to determine the optical scaling, but since it's such a thin taper it throws things off.

This is why we need the Kindersley algorithm.

hhp

> Did you scale an outlined version, or a “fonted” version?

The text was (and is) still "fonted". Note that the new PDF specimen is not scaled at all.

Yes, it was unfair of me to criticize the type designer for the sins of the typographer (sorry Grant, we all learn the hard way when dealing with new software features such as "Optical Kerning", but you more than made amends by getting to the heart of the issue so quickly).

On the positive side, I discovered two things. First, that Brio has a mixture of differently sloped letterforms, which I wouldn't have noticed unless I'd been trying to figure out what was wrong with the text setting. It's something I usually associated with baroque italics. Maybe it leads to a design idea down the road.

Second, beware of "Optical Kerning".

Optical Kerning is great for kerning multiple fonts (e.g. a Type 1 and its expert set) together; it can also sometimes help to salvagine crappy [e.g. most freeware] fonts with crappy metrics and no kerning. But only so much turd-polishing can be automated.

Hrant said:

As for the integrity of Indy's optical spacing, I've found that it makes things better for 90% of the fonts out there, but a little worse for the best work.

I have seen the very same, and I'm not a lazy, thoughtless kerner.

salvage, that is

> most freeware

Indy's optical spacing can salvage much more than the lowly in the font pyramid. Mrs Eaves for example becomes usable for real text work thanks to it.

hhp

Grant --

Thanks for the comparison PDF. Indy's optical kerning had crossed my mind briefly, but I neglected to mention it.

I'm still curious about the H&Js that allowed that second line to be so darn loose.

-- K.

>I’m wondering if it’s appropriate for one type designer to criticize another’s work.

It depends on the quality of the criticism, doesn't it?

>It looks like the sidebearing on the right of the t is too wide (and too narrow on the left).

For the author of Richler (http://www.shinntype.com/Richler/Richler_Specimen.pdf), which is the worst-fitted typeface I have ever in my entire life seen, revealing a complete absence of technique and visual sense (see for example ev, fa, pe, me, ec, bo, ho, etc.) ... for such an amateur to criticize a competent technician like Robert Slimbach, seems to me the height either of overweaning arrogance or impenetrable stupidity.

Is it possible -- is it remotely possible -- that there exists in the entire world a publisher who has actually printed this font as shown in the specimen referenced above? It makes me ill even to think of it.

Oh, jesus h. christ, you have got to be kidding. can we leave this crap at home? he wasn't calling names, just voicing a concern, and he certainly didn't insult anyone. if you can't permanently can that kind of offensive crap, don't bother coming back. if you've got tourette's or something, though, i apologize. otherwise, please, go away.

>Richler_Specimen.pdf),
which is the worst-fitted typeface I have ever in my entire life

Thanks for pointing out the problem with the Richler specimen, Bill, although I thought your tone was somewhat harsh. But I do I agree with you, it looks like crap, and the reason is strangely similar to what happened with the Veer sample of Brio, ie, it's not the font that's at fault, but the document. When I made the pdf, I was having trouble making PDFs. I had printed the document from a Quark file and it looked fine. Then I made the PDF and never bothered to check it, so I wasn't aware that the metrics were all screwed up.
I've now replaced it with a PDF that is correct. Of course, you may still not like it (Richler doesn't use the normal strategy for spacing a book face), but it's certainly an improvement.

Taken like a man, Nick. There are still some spacing issues (bc, de), and your DIN didn't feel like loading, but it's looking better.

I'm sorry to trouble the folks here st this fine font site and and I really do dig the site but who is Bill Troop and why do3s he have a site]devoted to type design piracy?

I speak of LETIMES.COM.

I found one font that he's responsiple for. Is he a pre digital type maker
like Ed Bengiuat? Is he a photographer? I see he has voiced his concerns here before but who in tarnation is he?

signed,

Confused

Has anybody set & printed out text with Brioso?

I have a project in which I have quotes set display sizes and text commentary afterwards. Currently I am using Slimbach's Poetica for the quotes, and Minion for the commentary.

The Brioso italic looks wider than than Poetica. Any views on whether Brioso would work with display size quotes in italic with swashes, and extended text in the roman?

In fact a cursory analysis of the Richler PDF makes it very clear that there's some software strangeness going on - the font couldn't even do that on its own!

To conclude that it's a badly spaced font requires a blind predisposition to that conclusion.

--

I have some ideas who Bill Troop is, but certainly he'd explain it better.

hhp

If I was Nick, and if I received a nonsensical arrogant comment calling him an "amateur" (no matter the quality of his spacing in that typeface) I would have quit Typographica for a long time.
But fortunately Nick is not me and so we can count on the presence of "amateur professionals" like him here besides the one of "professional amateurs" like... huh? Bill Troop.

And I'm not saying this because I'm a friend of Nick. I would have said it for any serious professional, not for the quality of his/her types. There's too much lack of respect here, and I'm so glad Hrant is so nice recently.

Starship Trooper?
Maybe he's Robert Heinlein (if he's still alive, I don't recall)

Claudio, if you keep pissing me off like this by saying nice things, I'm gonna have to leave.

hhp

Neo, check the archives of the Type Design list (they're up somewhere, I don't have the url handy) and you'll find plenty of [often venomous, but nearly always fun and informative] messages by Bill Troop that may give you an idea. Especially piquant are the stories of his travails with Adobe. The one typeface by him that I've seen (digital, btw: it was one master of an MM face) - a reinterpretation of the work of an 18th century punchcutter - is very nice. IMHO.

http://type-design.p90.net/lists/type-design/

Reminder: our sidebar has links to all your requisite type sites, including the Type-Design list HQ. →

>confused

Zorry, Zweetie!

>I’ve now replaced it with a PDF that is correct.

I don't believe this story, but I'm glad that the spacing now looks better. However, Nick, you're far from off the hook. The Richler specimen says,

"In traditional book faces such as Minion (top), the sidebearings of round letters are narrower than those of the straight, producing a modulated rhythm. Richler (centre), with its squarish curved characters and their wide sidebearings -- adopted from the contemporary sans genre (e.g. DIN, below) -- has the contemporary beat of today."

There are many problems with this new spacing manifesto. For one, DIN is a monospace font!!!!!

So you're telling us we need to take our spacing for proportional fonts from monospace fonts in order to obtain that much-desired 'beat' of 'today'?

And if the 'beat' of 'today' was so desirable, why would we base our new typeface on such antique standards as Walbaum and Melior to begin with? But let's not digress.

No, I don't think there was a problem with the PDF. With all the years of problems I've had with Acrobat, I've never had that problem, and I've never heard of it. I think you did something extremely nutty with the spacing of Richler, published a rationale for it, and clung to it much longer than you should have. You're at the point now where you realize that you were 75% wrong, and you've tightened the spacing by 75%. In another few months, you'll realize you were 100% wrong, and tighten it up some more. If anything, the problem in spacing has always been too much space around o shapes. This was the conclusion that after a lifetime of spacing expertise Benton came to when he spaced out his 'Benton', which is one of the few text typefaces with (in my opinion) adequately tight o spaces.

It all goes to the point I have been trying to make for several weeks now, that a text typeface cannot under any normal circumstances be produced without active, expert collaboration.

Designers get type blind -- true, not often to the point that they space such that it looks like they have inserted whole spaces between letters -- but designers do get type blind. There has to be someone else looking at the stuff.

There is no substitute for expert collaboration, but in its absence, Walter Tracy's guide to spacing is well-known. Ultimately, however, the eye must guide. There will always be something in each design that must be fit against the rules. However, there is no justification for claiming that proportionally designed fonts must be spaced according to monospace rules in order to gain a contemporary look, other than that one is either too lazy or too goofy to space properly.

Text type takes time. That's why Jeff Level named our foundry Adagio, a name I have always disliked.

You know, sometimes I think I'm the only person in type who has nothing to hide.

> I’ve never heard of it.

And I'd never heard of you 5 years ago, but you existed nonetheless.

There are certainly bugs in any software; specifically, early versions of InDesign did some very strange things with kerning pairs when outputting PDFs.

> sometimes I think I’m the only person in type who has nothing to hide.

Maybe because you [feel you] have nothing to gain? You leave the impression of using the type world as a whipping boy. Let's see you release your precious Vafflard, eh?

hhp

>Maybe because you [feel you] have nothing to gain? You leave the impression of using the type world as a whipping boy. Let’s see you release your precious Vafflard, eh?

This gets a bit cryptic for me, but I'm sure if Bill Troop has really something to say and do we'll hear from him in the future.
I take your word for granted, Hrantie!

(and Henlein?)

>> I’ve never heard of it.
>And I’d never heard of you 5 years ago, but you existed nonetheless.

Sometimes Hrant really knows how to be so genunely ironic without getting harsh I really love him!
(now I just hope he does not go away because I'm talking nicely of him)

DIN is not a monospace font.

Give me whatever Bill is smoking today.

No, I'm going away because I'm spending the next two weeks in Costa Daurada and Barcelona.

Yallabye.

hhp