25 Systems For Classifying Typography

THE PARSONS INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION MAPPING
68 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10011
212 229 6825 piim.newschool.edu
ITAL
IC
16T
25 Systems for Classifying Typography: A Study in Naming Frequency

TAy Lor CH I Lders Jess ICA G r Is C TI LIBerTy Le B e N
SCRIPT
IQUE DON ANT REN CLA
ER
FAT FACE
SCRIPTS
GO
FORME
SO MM E
LIN EA
MA
LE
NU
FRAKTUR
AIR E
HU MA NIS T
TE
XT
TH
UR
TH 19
IC
CE UR NT
ETT
UE
Y PLA DIS
CKL
AN TIQ
BLA
18TH
ORNA
SCRIPT
MENT
ALS
CEN
/ AN
GROTE SK
DISPLAY
TH
IC
INCISE S
GO
SCHW
FRAC TURE
BLACKLETTER LINEAL
RD BATA
HER ABAC
TUR
TIQ
UA
STYLE
OLD
ELZ EVI
CE NT
DID
UR
ON
MO
ITALIAN
DE
RN
REALE
GE
RA
LD
ITA
LIE
NN
CL
AS
SIC
AL
DIDOT
RENAISSANCE
FRAKTUR
GAELIC
OUT LINE
WAB ACH
DO
RIP
GRA
REN
T
MA GR NU APH AL/ IC
SCH
FA
GER
SCR
IPT
CE
SHA
DED
CA
LLI
GR
AP
HA
NC IL
ND
WR
ALD
STE
ITT
TEX
TU
RA
GL YP HI C
CLA
FA
HIC
RO
TUN DA
PHI C
LINEALE
SC
TEXTURA
ER
PRE
SCRIPT
SCH WA BAC HER
ROMANS
ED ENS ND CO
17T
VEN
H CEN
TUR
Y
ITAL IC
ROMAN
EN
CALLIGRAPHICS CLASSICALS
GLYPHIC
DECO
RATE
DISPLAY
D
OLD
FACE
SCRIP
BLACKLETTER
T
HYBRIDA
HUMANI
GOTHIC
SCRIPT
MICS.
ST
BLACKLETTER
FRAKTU
HUMANIST
RENAISSANCE
MODERNISED
ITAL IC
MODERNS
GEO MET RIC
ANTIQ
ME
UA
ROT
BOOK
IC
OLD
VIN
FACE
LIN
ES QU
NE GR OOT
ESQU E
B SER
ISTIC
HUMANIST
DIDONE
SLA
INDUSTRIAL/ VERNACULAR
MECHAN
GROT
TRANSI
TIONAL
GE
NE
RA
LD
O-G RO
IF
T.
ROTUNDA
PRO MA CES NIP SED ULA TED
HUMANIST
AL
ORN AMENT
GO ANT THI IQU C E
GEO
HUM
BA
STA
ANIS
SCRIPT
PE
PROB
DISPLAY
LEMS
CAL
LIG
RAP
HIC
AP
NE O
RD
TIN LA
RIO
RE
NA
OR NA
DIN
GB
ATS
GR
GR OT
ISS
ME
AN
ES
QU
CE
NT AL
MET
GOTHI
REALIS
RIC
BLACKLETTER
TEXT
HAN DWR ITING
FAT FACE
Typeface Classification, type specimens, type systems, typeface taxonomy, typography

K EYW O R D S ProJe C T d ATe A Bs Tr A CT
GEOMETRIC
SANS SERIF
STYLE
VENETIA
OLD
GOT
HIC
SERIF
ALD
SE RIF
ROMAN
FA T
CLA SSI CA L
NE
SQ UA RE
SIT
UE
FA
CE
PRIM
MOD ERN
AN
OT
RN
LYRICA L MODE
ESQ
TR
ER
AN
S.
MO
DE
NE
REV
ION
PO
AL
INE
ST
GR
OT
IVA
TR
GR
TE R
NS
GE
TIC
BLA CK LET
SANS
HUM
ANIS
SCRIPT
TER
TIT
LIN
20T RO H CE MA NT N .
SA
OM
BL AC KL ET
GR
OT
ES
QU
ROT
UND
TOPICAL
A
BR
ET
US H
RIC
EGY
HU
SE
PTIA
RIF
TRANSIT
IONAL
GLY PHI C
DUTCH
MODER
NAL
SLAB/SQUA
October 2012January 2013
OLD STYLE
GEOMETRIC
SANS SERIF
OLD STYLE
B SER
ST YL
SERIF
TR AN SIT
. CENT E 20TH ESQU GROT
IF
SERIF
OLD FACE
TRA NS ITIO
TIO NA L
ITA LIA
CO NTE MP.
BOOK
SLA B SER
LATE
VENETIA
GEOMETRIC
IF
SLA
RE
NA
TRA
EAR
IO
HU MA NIS
NSI
. NT CE UE H ESQ 19T OT GR
O LD
NA
LY
TIO
EN
MONOLINE
HAND WRITT
TOR
ALS
DISPLAY
RM FO AL
TIVE & DECORA DISPLAY

H US
RA
CO
CA
EX FRE OT EFO IC/ RM

HA ND
STENCIL
ICA
HIS
TIV
PIT
DE
TE
ET
KL
SCRIPT DISPLAY
SC
TEX TUR
RIP
TYP
EW
RIT
&
ER
BR
AC
ROTU
BL
NDA
EXPE
RIME
NTAL
SANS SERIF
TECHNO
SCHWABACHER
COMPUT ER RELATED
Varying typeforms for the Western printing process have been concurrently designed since the invention of the printing press c1450. Even though the variation of styles have expanded in number with fairly good documentation, and even though the process has been essentially evolutionary, the design community has yet to develop a comprehensive system of classification. Many attempts have been made to standardize but no naming system has been successful to the point of its general adaption. This paper analyses 25 typeface classification systems published in the last century, ranging from typographic greats like Theodore Low De Vinne and Maximilien Vox and culminating with contemporary type and design scholars such as Ellen Lupton and Robert Bringhurst. Each system (despite its original visual organization or lack thereof) is presented through a color-coded pie chart. The color codes reference three main branches of type design: Serif, Sans Serif, and Topical (Topical is the term used by Bevington/Chong to reference a subdivision of non-text faces). In our concluding demonstration we use this term Topical, to replace Display. By examining a wide cross section of naming taxonomies, we observe those names that have prevailed, those that failed, and those that deserve renewed support in the hierarchy of typeface classes. We see the useful, and the daring, as they are removed or affixed to the typographic lexicon. Each name, from all the systems, within our wider categories of Serif, Sans Serif, and Topical are collected into a series of master diagrams. From these a final, suggested master classificationour cumulative research effort is presented. We submit this master as a suggested industry standard.
I N Trod U CTI o N
BLACKLETTER
OLD STYLE
FRAKTU
SERIF SANS SERIF

IC
NIS
TRA
FAC E
RA
SCRIPT
AB
SL
RN
RIF
SE
GL
YPH
T
IC
NEO-GROTES.
MA
SA NS
METR
GROTESQU
Figure: A visual overview of 25 typographic classifications and animals. In the typographic world, a shared standardized system of classification is lacking. Typographers and type scholars have attempted to create proper systems of organization for decades. These systems date back to at least 1899, when Theodore Low DeVinne published a typographic classification system in his book, The Practice of Typography. With the invention of the printing press, photo reproduction, and post script fonts, printing became more efficient and typographic practice became more widespread. Today the typographic world is cluttered with examples along many design approaches; a logical way to name the group to which any particular design is challenging. One style can have two, even three names, all meaning essentially the same exact thing. Typographers who create systems often have a difficult time deciding which name to chose. Sometimes, they chose both. Major problem occurs in topical and display classifications. With so many styles of topical typefaces all obtaining such specific differences, it is often hard to classify them into larger groups. While some create an abundance of classifications for such typefaces, others ignore the problem completely. Ignoring these topical designs leaves a large number of type styles unaccounted for, or relegated into the others category. Through the examination of the history of typographic classification, it may be possible to create a unified taxonomy using a consistent naming logic. The final visual in this paper displays such unified logic; it, in turn, is constructed from a series of seven composite displays. These seven composites are organized according to the findings from the twenty five examples that preceed. (Note: we capitalize classes when they are specified as classes within any particular system, and do not capitalize when they are noted but not included in that particular system.)
2013 PARSONS JOURNAL FOR INFORMATION MAPPING AND PARSONS INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION MAPPING
A taxonomy may be defined as the study classification. Without scientific classifications in biology, there would be no consistent professional jargon, and scientists would be far less effectively communicative when studying plants
PIIM IS A RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FACILITY AT THE NEW SCHOOL
GEO
SERIF
MODER
MODERN
HU
TRA
NS
ITIO
NA
MO
DER
EG
MO
NO
YP TI
UNI
CAL
MO
DE
SP
RAL
DE
AN
AL
OLD
NSIT ION
MODER
DECORAT DISPLAY
DA
IC
AR
IST
ST
AN
BA
LS
CH
UND
EA
CEN
HUM
SERIF
ANIS
ROMAN TS VARIAN
VENET IAN
GEOMET
RIC
SANS SERIF
HUMANI
SERIF
OT . ESQ NSI TRA
GE RAL DE
ROMAN
H 20T
AL
TIO
DIN E
GR
OT
ES
FRE
NC
GR
HI
SANS SERIF
VENET
GR
OT
IAN
GOT
HIC
ROMANTIC
BLACK
HUMANIST
LETTE
GLYPHIC
ALDINE
OLD STYLE
SLAB SERIF
SANS
GEOM ETRIC
HUMANIS
T
DUTC H
SERIF
ES.
CLARENDON
CLA REN DO
GER
ALD
MODERNS
NE O
MODE
RN
RNIST
N
FO
SCR
IVE/
DECOR
ATED
TEXTURA
DISPLAY
TRANSITIONAL
GEOMETRIC
CON
TEM
TRA
NSI
SERIF
NIS MA HU
OLD
STY
LE
SA
TO
OLE
SW
ASH
DECORATIVE & DISPLAY

ETTER BLACKL
VENETIA
SERIF
ED AC
TRA
GA
CLA SSIC AL
R
ETIA N
MEC S ANE
TIAN EGYP
B SLA
YPT EG NE IEN
REVERSED
IONIC
CLASSICAL ROMAN
RN VE AR UL AC
SANS
BLAC KLETT
DOW SHA
ROT
SERIF
ISE INC PHI GLY
IAN YPT EG
UND
AN TR SIT ION AL
ED
ER
D/ C
GRA PHIC
SLAB
MOD ERN
ST ANI HUM
DIDONE
ST
GO TH
TEX TUR A
DI DO S NE
TRA
VEN ETIA N
OLD
OLD FACE
. NT CE
TIO
DIDONE
AL ION NSIS
TRANSISTIONAL
MODERN FACE
STYL E
L NA
LAY DISP DEC
E SQUAR
SAMPLED
NEA VILI CUR
SC RIP T IVE RS CU
SCR
ORA TIVE
TRANSITIONAL
IPT S
ESQ
UE
ETR OM NIS GE DER MO
ITALIC
IC
TIAN EGYP
AN TR SIT
NCH FRE
ION
AR CL
19TH
DIDO
S AL
WEDG E
SLAB
20TH CENT.
DIDON E
CEN
NE
CALLIGRAPHIC
TIMEREFRENCING
NDON CLARE
PLAC REFR EENC ING
ENG STYL ENCI REFR
UAL CAS
YP EG TIA N
VE RSI CU
SA NS SE
RM AL
IPT
MA T NIS
RI F
ND E HA FRE
CURSIVE
MODERN
SPE ERIA NC N
SA NS SE RIF
POR
ARY
DER MO
ITA
CLAREN DON
LIC
MOD ERN
TRANSITIONAL
OLD
FRENCH
STYLE
OUTLINE
BRUSH
INL INE
NS
SC RIP T
PE N
SE
TER/ KLET BLAC KEN BRO
RI F
LATIN
SA NS
SL AB SE
LAT IN
RIF
NSI
SLAB
TIO
DIDONE
NA L
25 SYSTEMS FOR CLASSIFYING TYPOGRAPHY: A STUDY IN NAMING FREQUENCY TAYLOR CHILDERS, JESSICA GRISCTI, AND LIBERTY LEBEN
/ UE TIQ ON AN END R A CL
FAT FAC E
G O TH IC
SCRIPTS
TE
UE
ET
DI
KL
TIQ
SP
AC
BL
SCRIPT
ORN
AME
NTA
LS
ITA
LIC
ER
ITALIAN
DIDOT
TH e P r A C TI C e oF TyPoG rAPH y
T HIB A U de A U C LA ss IF IC AT Io N
Theodore Low De Vinne Theodore Low De Vinne was an American typographer and printer practicing in the late nineteenth century. In The Practice of Typography De Vinne details the organizing systems popularized in type specimen books, commenting, but all ornamental types, and indeed many plain types, are named and classified in an unsatisfactory manner. Which might be because his approach to typeface classification is very classic. De Vinne does not include Clarendons, or slab serifs, with the Romans, or serif, types. Instead, he lumps Clarendons in the display category along with fat faces and the sans serifs, referred to by De Vinne as Gothics. In fact, it is not until the 1950s that sans serif faces are treated like their serif predecessors, with a proper category of their own, when ATypI remodels the Maximillen Vox system.
Francis Thibaudeau Parisian Typesetter Francis Thibaudeau was determined to create the first rational system for categorizing type. He worked as a French typographer who designed type specimens for Renault and Marcou and Derbergny and Peignot. Thibadeau was motivated to create a new system due to the density and disorganization of the type catalogs he was charged with designing. Originally, there were only four main categories: Roman, Didot, Egyptian, and Antique. Due to his French perspective, he uses Didot to describe Modern Roman typography, rather than the Didone popularized some years later by the Vox System in 1954. He also uses Antique to describe sans serif capital faces, like those drawn by the Romans and Greeks. Thibaudeau later added the Script and Display sections to categorize types used in advertising. Of the systems of his day, the one he put forward was quite logical and was the simplest. In beginning a new taxonomy for typefaces, it is best to start small before adding a lot of subclassifications to cover the minutiae of typography. In that regard, Francis Thibaudeau made an excellent division of types and nomenclatures.
PA R SON S journal FOR INFO RM ATIO N M APPING V olume V issue 1 , Winter 2013 [page 2 ]
EL
ZE
VI E
OLD
ROMAN
EN SE D
STY
LE
AN
DISPLAY
Y LA
EG
CO ND
YP TIE NN
FORME
SCRIPT
SO
E LIN
E AL
AN
INCIS
18T
HC EN
/A
TUR
NT
ES
UR
NT
DI
TH
DO
16
NE
REALE
R GE
AL
DE
CE
P r I N TIN G Ty Pes
T He V o X sysT e M
Daniel Berkeley Updike Daniel Berkeley Updike was an American printer and typographic historian. In 1893, he founded the Merrymount Press in Providence, Rhode Island. In Printing Types, Updike discusses 15th century serif printing types in Europe with astounding depth, far more depth, in fact, then we could capture within our accompanying pie chart system. (Instead we present a simplified version of his typeface classification system). To see the detailed version, one would have to imagine six of these charts-one each for Germany, Italy, France, The Netherlands, Spain and England). In addition, there would be differentiations in each of those charts. Aside from it being clunky in that regard, its difficult to expect that a system that classifies type by the century would function when we have moved into an age of so many revivals. The specific year a typeface is created has less and less effect upon its ultimate classification. Of course, history applies to the form of serif families, but even this becomes suspect for many classifications. Additionally, the classification lacks hierarchies and sub-categories in most instances, and as such, it would be difficult for the general typeface-user population to remember the intricacies.
Maximilien Vox The closest to a broad consensus on typeface classification is the Vox System, created by Maximilien Vox in 1954. There are ten main categories, employing established terminology along with new terminology. As was vogue, he classifies the serif typefaces based upon their historical period and the remainder based on the visual appearance of the letter. Vox invented the term Geralde, combining Garamond and Aldine. The term is far more specific than the previous Old Style, but for its newness it was criticized. Beinging at first unfamiliar to the professionals who would be using the system; those critics had a point, but ultimately, they were wrong. The term Geralde is still being used in subsequent type classification systems sixty years later. The same goes for his invention of the term Lineal, which carries the false assumption that sans serif typefaces are inherently monoline. However, that term remained popular for several decades before it was replaced by Sans Serif around the 1980s.
VE
H 17T
NE
CE
NT
ITA
LIC
TIA
UR
19 TH
Y
UA
IR
CE N TU RY
GO TH IC IQ UA
CLASSICAL ROMAN
FRA
BAT ARD
CTU RE
MEC ANE S
VE RN AC UL AR
GAELIC
HI
AP
BLA CKL ETT
FRAKTUR
UM A S NI T
TE
GR
XT
TR AN SI TI O N AL
LD
ESK
GE
SC
RI
PT
UR
ER
SCH
RA
WAB
GROT
E
CLASSICALS
CALLIGRAPHICS
BLACKLETTER LINEAL
ACH
HIC GLYP
ER
HUMANIST
NE
MODERNS
GE
EA
LS
EC
HA
UE
NI
N G EO RO TE SQ
ST
IC
IT
QUE
LI
EN
TES
GRO
RENAISSANCE
S LA
SI
CA
T H e V o X ATy P I sys TeM
s C Hr IF T MU ss PA sseN
Maximilien Vox Association Typographique Internationale (ATypi) was Founded by Charles Peginot in 1957. The non-profit reaches over 40 nations.. They provide assembly for the typographic community to meet and act together. The Vox ATypI system is based on the 1954 iteration of The Vox System. Upon its release, that system was widely regarded as the standard in typeface classification. The ATypI revised version adds much needed subclassifications to the Lineal section, which goes on to become the norm in Sans Serif subclassification. This classification divided all of the categories into three main classes; Classicals, Moderns and Calligraphics, a bold choice. The Moderns category includes both serif and sans serif typefaces. Using Calligraphics to head the topical category is misleading, because not all of the sub categories are calligraphic in nature. All in all, its a good improvement on its predecessor, but its still not perfect.
L. Nettlehorst2 Schrift Muss Passen was published in 1959 for the business and advertising publishing company, Essen. The name translates roughly to Writing Must Fit Font Choice. It appears within Written Expression in Advertising; Manual for the Artwork of Advertising Materials, a book that focuses on the proper use of typography in advertising materials. It also includes and thorough classification system. This is the first time the Lineal category has been sub-classified, though part of that credit is due to Maximilien Vox, who was working on a revised version of his 1954 system that was to include four subcategories for the Lineals. Schrift Muss Passen has two subclasses, Grotesk, and Humanist. It would be hard to force geometric sans serif faces into either of those two categories, and since there is no catch-all display section in this system, there would be no place for these faces to go. Nettlehorsts classification of Serif typefaces is interesting. So soon after the publication of Voxs system, his subclasses, Venetian and Geralde, hadnt yet caught on. Scholars are often insistent on inventing their own terminology, but good scholarship does not always win, it is often the marketing that determines naming protocol.
PRE
OM
ET
RIC
LIN
ROMAN
CLA
SSIC
MO DER N
DIDO
AL
SL AB
EGY PTIA N
HU MA
HUMANIS T
NI ST
REVERSED
IONIC
FRAKTUR
SANS
NE
TLI
OU
DO
EN
FA
CL
SH
CE
AD
ED
DISPLAY
CA
LL
IG
RA
H
C IL
CE
SC
AR
FA
PH
IC
HW
AB
AC
HE
SH AD
EG YP TI AN
RO
SERIF
TU
OW ED
ND A
AN
ST
EN
RI
TT
X TE
TU
RA
DEC
EN
BLACKLETTER
HYBR IDA
ORA
TED
FA OLD
SCRIP
GOTHIC
SCRIPT
MICS.
MODERNI
LIC
RENAISSAN
CE
SED
AN
U TIQ
ITA
BOOK
OLD
FAC
T RO
UN
DA
TA RD A
VI
ROMAN
20 A
A
AN ROM ANTS I VAR

SERIF
TE SK
TR
VEN
ETIA
GO TH IC
NC
EN
TIO
FR
UR
XT
SE
BA
RIF
LD
IN
GR
EN
CH
TH
AN
FACE
DIDONE
VE NE
OL
MOD
TRANSISTIONAL
CE NT
SIS
LE TY DS
TE
AB
ION
SL
OLD
T H e H Is Tory o F PrI N TI N G TyPes
TIA N
ERN F ACE
AL
d IN 1 6 5 1 8 N
Geoffrey Dowding Dowdings system continues the outdated trend of separating the Romans and the Italicslong after their contemporaries stopped regarding the two as separate typefaces, choosing instead to see a roman and its italic as two fonts within same type family. Of course the actual form of the Roman and Italic variants may differ, but placing them across categories is a production and organizational awkwardness. Additionally, Dowding uses the term Old Style to categorize 19th century types when hes already used Old Face to describe 15th century types. Its cluttered, and there is little to no parallelism in his system. Some sections are named by historical period while others are named for style. Dowdings attempt to quantify and classify display types is admirable in its sheer number of categories, but the Miscellaneous section undermines the whole exercise toward a comprehensive solution. There is no point in creating all of those categories if the author still needs to add a catch-all category.
Germany3 In 1959, The Deustche Industrie Normung released a draft of a classification system that was related to Voxs, but considerably more complicated. The later revised system, DIN 16518, is almost identical to the Vox system. Being a German system, DIN established a standard in sub-classification of Blackletter typefaces, a sub-classification that is often referenced in subsequent taxonomies. After Vox, a standard in Old Style Serif classification is starting to develop that is exhibited in the DIN 16518 system: Venetian, for Humanist Serif types developed generally in the 15th century; French, otherwise known as Geralde, for faces that came in the next two centuries that have more contrast between the thickness and thinness of strokes; Transitionals for the period in the 18th century where the axis of curves was often vertical and serifs were unbracketed. All sans serif faces are organized into a single category, Grotesk, even though sub-classifications to that category had already been made. The topical category leaves a little to be desired. Handwritten scripts are the only topical called out with their own section, and it seems that anything left that doesnt fit the mold is dumped into Roman Variants.
IC
M GR ANU AP AL HI / C
RO
TU
RIP
ND
LINEA
SC
LE
TEXTU
RA
SCRIP T
D/ SE CI HIC IN YP GL
LY
SC
HW
AB
AC
HE
PH
GRA PHI C
HUMA
BLACKLETTER
NIST
FRAK
TUR
SLAB
NIS
GEOM
ETRIC
SANS SERIF SERIF
HUMA
NIST
MA
HU
O GR
TE
SQ
GE
TR
RA
OT
GR
MECH
SITION
NE
TRAN
ALS
GE
RA
ANIST
O-
LD
IC
B r I TIs H s TA N d Ards sys TeM
Great Britain British Standards (BS) is a service provider for businesses in 150 countries all over the world. They produce the British Standards as well as being responsible for the English publication of international and European standards in the UK. This system is also heavily based on the Vox System. It has been updated, the slab serif section is no longer called Mechanistic, but Slab. There are no subcategories, but there could be, especially since there are several old style serif categories. In 1965, Lineal was the usual term for sans serif and would be until the late 1980s. The BSs usage of Glyphic, Graphic and Script are direct holdovers from the Vox ATypI, which at this time, the most accepted standard in topical typeface classification. The British Standards doesnt include a Blackletter category, though that decision is probably based upon the fact that most Blackletter faces are inherently German, and there may have been a rejection for their use in a system for British standards of typography.
DI DO N ES
LD
AN
SIT IO
T HA Mes A N d HU dso N MA N U A L o F T y P o Gr A P H y
DIDO NE
NA L
Rurari McLean Ruari McLean started as a designer for Penguin books on their Puffin Picture Books line. He wrote many books on typography, the Thames and Hudson Manual of Typography included. As a result, he has varied, and respected experience in the typographic field. By 1980, scholars had dropped the term Mechanistic to refer to slab serif type. Other than that, McLeans system seems to fit the most widely accepted style. Humanist, Geralde and Transitional serif typefaces, followed by Didone. There are also the four main groups of Sans Serif and Blackletter typefaces. McLean doesnt subclass the topical typefaces, rather he groups them all into one category, Manual or Graphic. Its an interesting option, because even though theyve all been lumped into one, there is no failure in that approach in that he doesnt resort to using a miscellaneous sub section. Incised refers to the stone carved letters, and those typefaces modeled on that aesthetic. These faces are usually all capitals, like Eric Gills Perpetua Titling. Finally, he has a category for Script typefaces, referring to Scripts based on handwriting, rather than those typefaces that are drawn with the built-up method, which would fall into his Manual category.
ROTUNDA
GO AN THI TIQ C UE
GOTH
IC
HU
MA
AS
R TA
ORN
DA
LA
TI
AME
NTA
DIS PLA EC YD
BLACKLETTER
ITALIC
NIS
GEOMETRIC
GO
TH
IC
SERIF
AL DI NE
S SE QU RI AR F E
FA
FA
CE
PRIM ER
TR
S.
DER
MO
MOD
ERN
A N ATo M y o F A TyPeFACe
Alexander Lawson Alexander Lawson begins his treatise on classification with what should be on the mind of most typographic scholars: It must be admitted that the classification of printing types is a controversial subject and one upon which little amicable agreement may be expected.4 Lawsons system is consistent and easy to follow. He falls in with the usual tri-categorical solution for topical faces: Script, Display, and Blackletter. It makes sense to separate the Scripts out of the Display category, because Script faces are often regimented and formal. Display becomes a catch-all, but it is a better solution than trying to over classify topical typography only to find that a miscellaneous category is still needed. As for Sans Serif and Blackletter, his subclasses are consistent with the classifications of many other scholars, only his language is slightly different. He uses Gothic to describe grotesque sans serif, and Gothic Antique instead of Fraktur under the Blackletter section.
T He A rT o F T y P o Gr A P Hy: A N IN T rod U C T Io N T o T y P o .IC o N .o Gr A P Hy
Martin Solomon Martin Solomon makes a solid attempt to simplify the Topical category. Solomon uses three categories: Script, Ornamental and Period. Ornamental describing embellished typefaces, and period referring to faces that reference a period of time, or a specific art movement (later to be used by Bevington/Chong). The Latin script refers to a formalized Script based on the Italian hand, while Gothic script was based on the formal cursive handwriting of the chanceries in Germanywhat most other scholars refer to as Blackletter. The three categories do a succinct job of describing the topical category, if a little unconventional. Conversely, he has called the sans serif category Gothic while the usual term of his time was Lineal. Solomon separated Old Style (15th Century) typefaces from what he calls Primer typefaces, or text faces that were specifically developed for books, like Century Book. Other scholars have chosen not to differentiate these types from their old style counterparts, or name them based on their century of design, the 18th century.
OLD
TIAN
ROMAN
STY
VENE
LE
SC
T
RI PT CU RS IV E
R PE
IO
SANS SERIF
ORA TIV E
TRANSITIO NAL
SCRIPT
TEXT
GOT
HIC
EGY PTIA N
FR EN CH
INDUSTRIAL/ VERNACULAR
RE
AT
RN
GB
AM
AI
DI
EN
N SA
TA
CE
REAL
IST
PR MA OCES NIP SED UL AT ED
SAM
CU RV ILI NE AR
PLED
RIC ET ST OM NI GE DER MO
PRO
BLE
DISPLAY
MS
CA
IG LL
RA
PH
IC
ROMANTIC
BLACKLE
TTER
HUMANIST
SANS
AL
HUMA
NIST
CL
GEO
AS
IC ETR
T . ES
SIC
SERIF
TR
GE
RA
PO
QU
ST
OT
DE
EO
O GR
LD
NE
AN
SI TI O
ES
GE
RN
LYRIC
DID
AL
WED
DE AL MO
GR
RNIST
ON
SLAB
T H e e Le M e N Ts oF TyPoG rAPH I C sTyL e
eye MA GA ZIN e V 1 9 I5
Robert Bringhurst Robert Bringhurst is a man of many trades. The Los Angeles native who currently resides in Canada is a poet, book designer, typographer, historian, and linguist. Bringhursts book contains a classification system based in a chronology and calligraphy. Bringhurst uses rather poetic language to describe the eight divisions that make up his system: Renaissance (15th & 16th centuries), Baroque (17th century), Neoclassical (18th century), Romantic (18th and 19th centuries), Realist (19th & early 20th centuries), Geometric Modernist (20th century), Lyrical Modernist (20th century) and Postmodern (late 20th & early 21st century). Bringhurst uses the same name for serif and sans serif faces. Instead he combines the two in one category based on style and chronology. For example, a Realist sans serif would have an unmodulated stroke and vertical axis. A Realist serif would be exactly the same in style with the edition of abrupt feet with equal weight.
Catherine Dixon By the time Dixon wrote her article for Eye Magazine in 1995, Voxs system was inadequate to cover much of the contemporary design work in the typographic field, and so, shes envisioned a system of her own. Its consistent, and her handling of the serif category is rather sublime; she doesnt muddle it with conflicting categories. She uses the most commonly accepted term for each section, and all terms are that which describe the movement. Dixon doesnt needlessly flip from Humanist and Geralde to 18th century to the cryptic modern. There should not be a Problems category in the Sans Serif section. It is unnecessarily and undermines the efficacy of the rest of her system. Since the onset of their popularity, theyve been the easiest of the three main sections to sub-classify. Should there be a sans serif that doesnt actually fit in those categories, all other typographic scholars have considered them to be a topical typeface. At least her topicals section doesnt have a catch-all other category. And that might be the saving grace of her system. The only problem is, in most systems, when a scholar tries too specifically to define the myriad world of topical typography, there is always an outlier.
HUMANIST
ETR
SQU ARE
IC
TRANS
OM
GE
N G EO RO TE S
RA
PH
GE
TE SQ UE
IC
SANS SERIF
ET
C RI
ITION
AL
SC RI PT S
HU MA
VEN
ETIA
O GR
SANS
OLD STYLE
NI ST
GLYPHIC
ALDINE
OLD STYLE
SLAB SERI F
CLARENDON
CL AR
IO
V RE
NA
IV
AL
MODERNS
LS
TR
SIT
SI
TI
AN
ONE
TR
A LP H A B e T
DID
MODE
RN
T HIN k IN G w IT H Ty P e
Allan Haley Former president of International Typeface Corporation, editor-in-chief of U&lc, typographer and author, Allen Haley wrote Alphabet: The History, Evolution and Design of the Letters We Use Today. Haleys typeface classification system is based on history and evolution. He uses the terms Old Style, Transitional, Modern, Clarendon, Slab Serif, Glyphic, Sans Serif, Scripts and Graphic. Through his system, Haley hopes to have found a compromise between using a simple sans versus serif system and a system based off of hundreds of classifications. It is a rich and fairly complex system benefiting for its increased specificity, but awkward perhaps because it has many classes within unequal categories and sub-categories. Haley acknowledges that there are few things in typography that can be certainly defined and hopes his system leaves more room for debate compared to the more standardized systems.5
Ellen Lupton Ellen Lupton, a typography professor was inspired to write Thinking With Type: A Critical Guide For Designers, Writers, Editors & Students when she struggled to find a textbook for her type classes. Lupton published Thinking with Type in 2004. An enlarged, second edition, arrived in 2010. In the book she portrays a classification system that has seven categories with corresponding exemplary typefaces: Humanist or Old Style (Sabon), Transitional (Baskerville), Modern (Bodoni), Egyptian or Slab Serif (Clarendon), Humanist Sans Serif (Gill Sans), Transitional Sans Serif (Helvetica) and Geometric Sans Serif (Futura). Lupton completely ignores display faces and calligraphics, that might be for the best. There is no better way to handle the oft-fought-over topical typefaces than to ignore them completely. As seen with other type classification systems, these often get lumped into an other category or they become part of a multilayer system with a too many terms. Subtle, yet important differences make subcategories almost impossible. Unlike Bringhurst, Lupton clearly separates serif and sans serif. She uses the same three terms to describe each (humanist, transitional and geometric), making her logic easy to follow.
SLA
EN
DO
BS ER
DUT
CH
SERIF
IF
N EO CL
19T T EN HC
20TH CENT.
R.
CALLIGRA
DW
HAN
AC
KL
ET
TE
EGY
PTIA
RIT
N
FO
ING
CA SU AL
PHIC
BL
SA NS SE RI F
HU MA
RM A L
NIS
SCRIPT
TIC
TIT
LIN
TIVE/ DECORA DISPLAY
YL
ST
LD
YP
SLAB/ SQUAR E
NSI
HI
GL
des I G N IN G w I T H TyPe
James Craig Cooper Union professor James Craig wrote Designing with Type for his students. In 2005, Craig published the fifth edition of Designing with Type: The Essential Guide to Typography. The first edition of Designing With Type goes back to 1961. The book is probably the widest selling book through the decades on typography, in excess of 300,000 copies. Mr. Craig was frustrated by his experience when learning typography at Yale and set out to simplify the educational experience of learning about type. Interestingly, when the book was first published most typesetting was still hot metal; the book evolved along with technologies in phototypesetting, professional digital typesetting processes, desktop publishing, and contemporary digital practice. He has remained loyal to his original, albeit oversimplified five categories. He refers to these as the five classical divisions and associates a representative typeface for each: Garamond (Old Style), Baskerville (Transitional), Bodoni (Modern), Century Expanded (Egyptian), and Helvetica (Sans Serif). He sometimes refers to Century Expanded as a Modified Egyptian. Over the years of Designing with Type contributing authors (William Bevington and Irene Korol Scala) have contributed to up-to-date character of the book, but the classification system is still based on the initial concept for extreme simplification.
PA R SON S journal FOR INFO RM ATIO N M APPING V olume V issue 1 , Winter 2013 [page 1 0 ]
MODERN
GEOMETRIC
SANS SERIF
OLD
. ENT E HC 20T TESQU GRO
STYL
SERIF
T.
TR
AN
TRA
N E CE QU S TH TE 9 1 RO G
SIT
IO
NA
M OD
CLAR
ER
TIO
NA
END
ON
Ty P e r U Les!
Ilene Sritzver Stritzver was most well known for her position as director of Typeface Development for International Typeface Corporation (ITC). Before that, she was the creative and production director of Upper & lowercase, the awardwinning international journal for typography and typographic design. Aside from the cheeky title of her book, Stritzvers classification system is rather clever. It is the most similar to the resolved version that the authors presents at the end of this paper. She uses the most popular terms to describe her subcategories, including Old Style, Transitional and Modern as well as the subcategories of Sans Serif, Humanistic, Geometric and Grotesque. The only problem there is her peculiar use of 19th and 20th century Grotesque instead of the more popular grotesque and Neo-grotesque. As is common, the classification of the topical typefaces leaves something to be desired. It serves to cover all of the faces in the category, but the Decorative/Display section acts as the catch-all for everything that doesnt fit everywhere else. It is effective, but sloppy and allows many forms to be jumbled together in this catch-all category.
EGY
PTIA
SA NS SE RI F
TRA
NSI
TIO
NA
T y Pe ForM s : A H I sTory
Alan Bartram Bartrams serif classification is consistent; he uses the popular manner of classification for Old Face types: organizing them by country of origin. But the system is stuck in the past in that hes still separating the italic faces from their roman counterparts. Furthermore, his choice to separate the Grotesque faces from the Sans Serif umbrella that most scholars place them under, is rather peculiar. Of the choice, Bantram says, Whereas sans serif types are generally more observant of the classic, traditional structure, grotesques have moved into a world of their own. Widths of letters have to some extent been made consistent with one another; shapes are often distorted, especially in the heavier weights (which can be extreme); early versions, those used for Victorian jobbing work, quite abandon accepted ideas of good letter design in their attempts to achieve impact...It is not named grotesque for nothing.6 While his disdain for the class is obvious, what is not obvious are the characteristics that define a letter as Grotesque as a opposed to Sans Serif.. Therefore, the category has the feel of an other category for the few sans serif faces that do not fit into his general Sans Serif category, which by his standards of classification, Sanserifs are largely monoline, which distinguishes them from the more colorful and aggressive grotesques...this is really a classical type without serifs would be called humanist sans serif by any other contemporary scholar.7 Bantram is the first person since Geoffrey Dowding to use the term 20th century to describe types made in digital printing age based on the model of the 15th century metal fonts. The only difference between the two is that Dowdings category refers to photo type, just becoming popular at that time, where Bantram means, of course, digital type produced with open type technology.
LD
ST
PA R SON S journal FOR INFO RM ATIO N M APPING V olume V issue 1 , Winter 2013 [page 1 1 ] 2013 PARSONS JOURNAL FOR INFORMATION MAPPING AND PARSONS INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION MAPPING
YL
MODERN
TIMEREFRENCING
G LE- CIN STYFREN RE
PLA C REF EREN CI
NG
RO
TU
TOPICAL
BR
SH
ET
TE
ND
KL
CU RS IV E
SC
RIP
FR EE
BL
TEXTURA
AC
DISPLAY
HA ND
CURS
IVE
AB
SE
GEOME
RIF
TRIC
TEXT
F
GEOMETRI
CO RA NTE RY M P
SA NS SE RI
P.
SL
T ON
EM
SERIF
T
O-
IS
UM
AN
AN
OLD
TRANSITIONAL
HU
IS
DER
STY
MO
LE
T y Po G r A P H I C sys TMes: Pr ACTI Ce & Pro Ced U re
William Bevington and Siu Chong For an upcoming publication, William Bevington and Siu Chong classify fonts through two organizational schemas. First, they wished to identify a numerically logical sequence of main divisions. These begin with two classes: Text and Display. These two major groups divide typefaces into equal fields. Each of these have three divisions: Sans Serif, Serif, and Slab Serif under the Text category; and Topical, Blackletter, and Freehand under the Display category. The logic continues to the next step with three categories under each of these groupings. (Serif having Old Style, Transitional, and Modern; Freehand having Cursive, Script, and Brush, for example). As the taxonomy is logically formed of two major groups with three divisions within each of these and three sub-divisions within each of these the eighteen final classes are generated in a symmetrical pattern which assists in the memorization of the classes. The second schema is derived by arranging the typeface designs within a scatterplot field along two distinctive dimensions for each sub-category. For example, for the Sans Serif sub-classification the characters are compared against dimensions of stroke thickness variation and x-height value. This places some fonts at one extreme of Humanist and others at the extreme of Geometric. In another example, for the Blackletter classes, aspects of Gothic (angular) to Roman (roundness) form one dimension, while compactness and obliqueness from another dimension. The goal was also to deal with the greatly increased number of display and specialty faces, taxonomies, and naming protocols that have arisen in the last century, particularly so in the last several decades. This was to be done without using an other or catch-all category. The Bevington/Chong divisions constrain the taxonomy to an equal division between essentially text, versus non-text faces. To achieve this Topical Display faces are recognized through their noun-value, i.e., how they design-reference aspects of Place, Style, or Time (in the system called Place Referencing, Style Referencing, and Time Referencing). However brilliant, the drawback of this is another unfamiliar method that type-users might not recognize it at the outset. Still, heres to hoping that it becomes a widely accepted practice, because it certainly is the only innovative, viable solution presented among all of the 25 analyzed systems.
MONOLINE
WRITT
EN
BRU
HAND
RIC
DISPLAY
FO RM
AL TO HIS
CO RA TI VE
SP EN CE RIA
SH
TE
DE
ET
TE
KL
XT
PE
UR
AC
SCRIPT DISPLAY
E YP
RI
TE
SC RIP T
ROT
BL
UND
EXP
ERI
ME
NTA
TECHNO
SCHWABACHER
BLACKLETTER
OLD ST YLE
FRAK
TURA
L ICA
SANS SERIF
SERIF
TR
AN
SIT
AB
ION
SL
NEO-GROTES.
MA
TRIC
NI
ST
GEO
SERIF
HU
ME
F o N TFo N T
Fontfont is a type foundry centered in Berlin, Germany created in 1990 by Erik Spiekermann and Neville Brody These two men wanted to push the limits of typography with a collection unlike any other out there. FontFont Fontshop has a one layer system for classifying typefaces. For being such a simple system, it is for the most part successful. Any typeface could fit in one of the six categories in the system. It works for what it is intended for; selling typefaces. In the end though, it is a one dimensional system that must ignore many designs, or misclassify them somewhat. Adding a second layer of sub-categories would substantially increase the amount of information and clarity in the system. Currently there is nothing that references time or style. Sans, Serif, Slab, Blackletter, Display and Script only reference structure of typography.
SA NS
UN
AL
P LY
IC
DE
RN
LA
GROTE SQUE
TI N
SLA B
PA r AT y P e
Paratype was established as a font department of Paragraph International in 1989 in Moscow, Russia. Taking a multilingual approach to typeface design, ParaType has a slightly different way of classifying type. Like the Bevington/ Chong system there is a clean symmetry to the logic which yields fifteen categories. A strong advantage is the inclusion of Slavonic characters. Their two level system is divided into Blackletter, Script, Decorative, Serif, Sans Serif, and as noted, Slavonic on the first level. Each first level category then has five subcategories, making the chart very well balanced. The Serif and Sans Serif categories provide traditional sub-classifications. We see a large amount of orange, indicating an abundance of Topicals. Though there are a fair number of naming terms, they are certainly informative and follow the same ideology as the Serif and Sans Serif subcategories. One niggling argument is that five divisions, although it looks nicely balanced, is, for certain first level categories excessive. Textura, Schwabacher, Rotunda, Fraktur and Uncial may all be needed in the Blackletter category, but this isnt the case for the whole system. Paratype appear to be searching for subcategories in Decorative category. Not only do they use Techno, they also use Decorative, which is not only repetitive, but rather ridiculous in a taxonomy of this depth: Display, Display seems more than just redundant. So, this is yet another system with an unresolved set of topical categories.
OUTL
US
BR
SC
H TO AN OL D ED
CA
PI
TA
& ATIVE DECOR AY DISPL
E FR XOT EE IC FO / RM
STEN
CIL
INE
LS
IN LIN E
SW
DECORATIVE & DISPLAY
RI
AS
PT
&
ER ETT CKL N BLA ROKE B
SANS SERIF
COMPU RELATE TER D
BLAC
KLETT
ER
/
FAC OLD
SCRIP
VENETIA
SERIF
SP E AC D
GA
RA
MOD
MODE
RN
TR
SA
S AN
ERN
NS
ITI
ON
SE
AL
RI
NO
LD
L IN o Ty Pe
Ottmar, youve cast a line of type! were the words spoken by the editor of the New York Tribune that inevitably gave the Linotype typesetting machine its name. Linotype Corporation, an 125 year old type foundry, was founded by the inventor of the Linotype machine, Ottmar Mergenthaler. Linotype today now operates as a wholly owned subsidiary of Monotype Imaging Holdings. They are the home to some of the mos esteemed and time honored typefaces, such as Helvetica, Frutiger, and Univers, to name just a few in the Sans Serif category. For these and other reasons Linotype is well respected in the global design community. Despite this, Linotypes classification system may be argued as collection of half-executed ideas. It seems as though the company wanted to keep it very simple so clients could easily find what they were looking for, but ultimately realized that typography cannot be classified in such a simple way. In order to reference specialty faces, a two layer system is needed. Maybe it is possible for typography classification to be watered down to an ultra simple form, but this would require committing to the idea fully and grouping other classes as extensively as Sans Serif for every example of such. FontFont is the closest to such a system.
SL AB SE RI F
8
TR AN SIT IO
DIDO NE
NA L
A do B e T y P e GU Ide
Known as the first name in digital type, Adobe Type Library is a collection of original typefaces designed specifically for electronic publishing. Adobe uses their PostScript software technology and craftsmanship of original typefaces to master the Adobe Type Library. Adobe assembled the Adobe Type Guide as a reference for designers, desktop publishers and business users. To aid designers when it comes to selecting type, Adobe included a type classification system in the Adobe Type Guide. It is a simplified version of the system adopted by the Association Typographique Internationale (ATypI), an organization that sets standards for the typographic industry. The system includes Venetian, Garalde, Transitional, Didone, Slab Serif, Sans Serif, Glyphic, Script, Display, Blackletter, Symbol, and Non-Latin.
OLD
STY
LE
SA NS SE RI F
MO
DER
L e Tr A seT
In 1959 Letraset was founded in London, England. They revolutionized the way the commercial artist may transfer pre printed lettering quickly and efficiently with the creation of what is still very popular today, the Dry Transfer. With the rise of Adobe and Macintosh, Letraset converted their library to open type. Letraset uses a one layer, typographic classification system that is inconsistent in its ideology. The serif categories are determined by style (egyptian, modern, latin and old style). But the Sans Serif category is not. A simple grotesque, neo-grotesque and transitional would allow Letraset to keep their one layer format as well as keep a consistent ideology. If this system was originally created in the early 1800 s, there may not have been a need to break up the sans serif category, but this was developed in the new millennium and there are too many sans serif faces to lump them into one category.
EG
YP
TI
AN
LATIN
serifs 1: Part one of a collective count of all serif classifications. Because of the large amount of terms, the team devised two charts for the serif classification. The outer circles document the usage of the term throughout the 25 classification systems studied.
17TH CENT
ENT HC 16T
18
TH
CE
NT
RE L VA VI
PO
19
STMO DE RN
TH
CE
NT
CENTURY
20TH CENT
ROMANTIC
PERIOD
SERIF
OC LA S A SIC L
NE
OL
CA L SI
ST
YL
AS
OL
CL
RENAISSAN
AL
PR
FA
SSIC
CE
CLA
CE
serifs 2: Part two showing a collective count of all serif classifications. Because of the large amount of terms, the team devised two charts for the serif classification. The outer circles document the usage of the term throughout the 25 classification systems studied.
VERNACULAR
PRIM
CEN
TIO
L T ICA NIS LYR DER MO
VIN
CO
GL YP
HI
ER
EN
SE
AN
IN
CI
SE
TIQ
UA
BO
OK
ALDIN
APPEARANCE
E
USEAGE
TEXT
ITALIC
VENETIAN
HUM
AN
IST
COUNTRY
DU TCH
GE
RA
LD
FR
EN
CH
EN
DO
NAL
I GL
RN
DI
SH
ITA
DE
TRANSI TIO
LIA
LATIN
MO
CO
slab serifs: A collective count of all slab serif classifications. The outer circles document the usage of the term throughout the 25 classification systems studied.
ITALIE
RA RY
NNE
ED
GE
TE M
PO
ME CHA TIC NIS
MECH
ANIST
IC
R LA
EN
DO
sans serifs: A collective count of all sans serif classifications. The outer circles document the usage of the term throughout the 25 classification systems studied.
SQ UA
20TH CENTURY GOTHIC
TI
CO
SI
NT
TR
AN
EM
PO
RA
RY
AL
M EO
ET
RE
HUM
EGY
T FA C FA E
U ENT HC 19T HIC T GO RY
REALIST
RI
PTI
C
ANIS T
GROTESQ
AN
UE
PR OB LE MS
HI
GEO MO METRIC DER NIS T
GL YP
SQUARE
NE GR OOT ES
L/ EA LE LIN EA LIN
IC GOTH
QU
display: A collective count of all display classifications. The outer circles document the usage of the term throughout the 25 classification systems studied.
MIS
SAMPLED
SHAD
ROMA
ED
SH AD OW ED
YL ER
PE
MO
EF ER EN CE
RE VE R SE D
R EAC PL N ER EF
RIA N-VA NTS
RI
ST
TE
CH
O
NC E
CE
NO
SP
AC
ED
CEL
TIM
E E-R
FE
RE
LAN
EOU
TOP
ICA
MANIPULA
TED
TYPEWRIT
ER
IONIC
DECORATE
INL
INE
S I TR AL
CAL
GR
LIGR
APH
IC
IN
DU
ED
-R
HAND-TOOLED
EX
EL
I ER
AT
EN
TA
L
OU TL IN
GR AP HIC
RN
AP
AM
HI
EN
TA
CAPIT
E/ ST
P.
RICAL
AL
EN
ALS/T
/IN
CO
NU
CI L
CIS
MA
HISTO
ITLIN G
ED
script: A collective count of all script classifications. The outer circles document the usage of the term throughout the 25 classification systems studied.
LATIN
MO
NO
LIN
GO TH IC
AE
LI
C
SP
C EN
ER
IA
EXO
TIC
SWAS
CURV
ILINE
AR
CUR
SIVE
EE HA ND
S CA
L UA
HA
DW
RI
TT
EN
BR
FORMAL
H US
FR
blackletter: A collective count of all blackletter classifications. The outer circles document the usage of the term throughout the 25 classification systems studied.
IQUA
BROKEN
AR ST DA UN IC AL
BA
RIDA HYB
ANT
AC
HE
FRAKTURA
resolved: The collective results of the authors investigations composed into a final taxonomic model for Typeface classification. The three areas distribute typographic forms over nineteen final classes. This model respects the full range of naming conventions without chasing Topicals down into subcategories that are too granular, while respecting the necessary sub-categories in other groups. It is felt that a very high level of specificity is achieved with this model without becoming overtly caught-up-up in unnecessary jargon. It is therefore more usual than over-simplified orders and viable for extensive typeface class naming uses.
FRAKTURA
RO
TUN
DA
RO
TU
SC
HW AB
GR
OT
ES
UE
LE BLACK TTER
RA
PH
IC
FO
NEO
-GR
OTE
SQU
TOPICAL SANS
TEX TUR
SCH A WAB
RM
A
GEOMETRIC
LE
LD
M HU
IS AN
SERIF
AB
STY
NN
LIE
CLAR ENDO N
ITA
IC TH GO
TE XT UR A
CHE R
AL
IPT SCR
HAND
WRITT
EN
VENETI
AN
GE
SL
UN
O IF
RM
SE
RA
LD
RIF
TRA NS ION IST
RE VI L VA
MODERN
AL
A reso LV ed sysTeM
We have chosen to divide our resolved Typeface Classification system into three parts; Serif, Sans Serif and Topical. In 1954, Maximilien Vox was the first typographic scholar to divide his system into a similar three categories. Rather than Classical and Moderns, which mix serif and sans-serif types between the two groups, weve chosen to divide our text faces based on the serifs. Instead of using the misleading header of Calligraphics, weve chosen to name our display faces Topical, because it clearly and accurately describes all of the types that would be listed underneath. After all, a Serif or a Sans Serif could surely be used as a display face, should the designer choose.
ser IF
There are four main categories of serif typefaces: Old Style, Transitional, Modern, and Slab Serif. Our subclasses of Old Style faces, can be described as follows. Venetian types are humanist serif faces developed in the 15th century. These type are characterized by short, thick, bracketed serifs, and ascenders with slanted serifs. There is little contrast between horizontals and verticals, and the lowercase e often has a stylized slanted cross stroke. Examples are Bembo and Jenson. Gerald is a term coined by Maximilien Vox, a nod to Claude Garamond and Aldus Manutius, two prolific typographers who practiced in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The category could also have been called French, but we felt that was too limiting to its intention. The section meant to hold typefaces made in the Gerald style, rather than only those that were cut in France. Geralde typefaces have more contrast between the thickness and thinness of strokes and more delicate proportions than the Venetian types. The axis of the curve in most letters is oblique as compared to the vertical axis of the next movement in old style typography, the Transitionals. Eighteenth century Transitional types like Deberny & Peignots Baskerville had an even stronger contrast between thick and thin strokes, so much so that the letters almost glitter on the page. These faces marked the difference between the Geralde and Modern didone typography. At the time that they were cutting types, typographers wouldnt have considered themselves in a transitional period. The term was only given to those typefaces after the beginning of Modern typography. As such, many find issue with the name. However, the alternate name for these types, Realist, never caught on with the same fervor that Transitional did, and so here, we revert to the most popular name. Weve also included a section for Revival Old Style faces, for those types designed post 19th century in the style of either Venetian,
Geralde, or Transitional typefaces. Modern typography started with typographers Giambattista Bodoni and Firmin Didot. Modern typography has almost become synonymous with Didone typography, which is of course takes its name from Didot and Bodoni. Modern types have the strongest contrast between thick and thin lines. The serifs are hairline thin and unbracketed. The final category in serif typefaces is Slab Serifs. These faces grew out of Modern typefaces. Slab serifs are heavy, often rectilinear serifs a thick or thicker than the rest of the letter. Clarendon slabs are of similar or smaller size to the body of the letter, and they are bracketed. Italienne slabs are also bracketed, but thicker than the body of the letter. We created the category Uniform Slab Serifs to cover slab faces that are of similar weight to the body of the letter, but left unbracketed.
sANs
These four Sans Serif subcategories have been standard since the Vox ATypI system in 1961. Grotesques, like Bertholds Azkidenz Grotesk were the first sans serif typeface. They originated in the nineteenth century, and therefore have some holdover from their predecessors; there is a degree of contrast between thick and thin strokes. From there, the Neo-Grotesque typefaces evolved in the 1950 s. They were cleaner, and more mechanical than the Grotesques. The Neo-Grotesque was a large part of Swiss typography; in the beginning, they were used as display faces. Their stroke contrast was minimal, the letters were set wider and the x-height was raised. Many grotesque faces, like Helvetica, have been drawn with a great degree of varying weights and widths to accommodate for their different uses in display design. Geometric Sans Serifs left behind all of their historical connotations. They were the most mechanical of all of the sans serifs, made to look as if they were developed by machine. The body of the letters are constructed from simple geometric shapes, often they are monoline, and there is little differentiation between each letter. Whereas the geometric abandons all notion of being derived from earlier typography, the humanist sans serif draws from the classical manuscript hand. The design is often informed by the classical Roman letter, and informs the decisions the designer makes to his fresh, monoline letter. The most celebrated humanist sans serif is Eric Gills Gill Sans.
T o P IC A Ls
While in the days of Johannes Gutenberg, the blackletter was the most common text face, now,as a modern civilization, we are no longer trained to read letters so dense and
calligraphic. Therefore, blackletter faces are now regarded as decorative. Textura is the most calligraphic form of blackletter. The letters are tall, narrow, and drawn with sharp, angular lines. Textura was used in France, England, and parts of Germany. Schwabacher blackletters are the earliest German print typefaces. It is closer to the manuscript handwriting that the Textura face. By 1530, it was replaced by the Fraktur, as the most oft-used text face in Germany. Fraktur faces were so common that almost all German blackletters of the time carried Fraktur somewhere in their name. The capital letters are created from a rounded C-shape, and S-shaped strokes. Rotunda, also know as Cursiva, blackletters is much like modern script, there are no real standards except that the letters run together. Scholars of all sorts have pulled the Script faces out of the general display sections because they can be qualified, classified and separated from display typography. Formal scripts are based on the writing of calligraphy masters. The letters are drawn either with a metal pen nib or quill. Handwritten scripts come from the more active modern hand. Strokes vary in width, and are generally not created with pen nib or quill. The most difficult task any typographic scholar has set out to do is classify the display types, and every scholar fails, whether because he has chosen to attempt classification or ignore the types entirely. We felt that neither solution was acceptable. Display faces are becoming more and more popular, and as we march father into Open Type, only more are expected to appear. There are simply too many faces to qualify, and far too many faces to leave them absent from our system. So weve carved out a place for them in our Graphic category. Graphic, because Display is a tired term that has failed too many times before. These typefaces often reference the style of something else, they are bold, statement pieces that arent meant for paragraphs of text, and so they need a bold category.
A Ck N owLedG eMeN T
B Io Gr A P Hy
Taylor Childers is currently a BFA in Communication Design at Parsons, The New School for Design, holds a design internship for the Indiana Department of Education. She has always had a particular fascination with the art of typography. Jessica Griscti is currently pursuing dual degree, BFA and BA In Communication Design and Writing at Parsons The New School for Design, Jessica Griscti is a part time designer for C&G Partners LLC. Shes been nursing an unhealthy fondness for all things typography before she learned to read. Liberty Leben is currently pursuing BFA in Communication Design at Parsons The New School for Design, Liberty Leben was born and raised in Wichita, KS, but spent her final years of high school living in Austin, TX. Liberty currently lives and studies in New York City.
N o T es 1 Theodore Low De Vinne, The Practice of Typography, (New York: The De Vinne Press, 1899), 183. 2 The system was published in German, so please allow for some slight inconsistencies with the translation. 3 The system was published in German, so please allow for some slight inconsistencies with the translation. 4 Alexander Lawson, Anatomy of a Typeface, (Boston: David R. Godine, 1990), 713. 5 Allen , Haley. Alphabet: The History, Evolution and Design of Letters We Use Today. (New York: WatsonGuptill Publications) 1995, 1013. 6 Alan Bartram, Typeforms: a history, (London: The British Library & Oak Knoll Press, 2007). 84. 7
We would like to thank Professor Paul Shaw for acquainting us with so many typeface classifying systems and moving us deeply down the path of taxonomic typography.
Bartram, Typeforms: A History, 77.
8 Linotype, History. Accessed January 7, 2013. http://www.linotype.com/49/history.html.
BI B LIo G r A P H y
Adobe Type Guide. Mountain View, CA: Adobe Systems, 1991. Print. Allen, Haley. Alphabet: The History, Evolution and Design of Letters We Use Today. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications, 1995. Bartram, Alan. Typeforms: a history. London: The British Library & Oak Knoll Press, 2007. Bringhurst, Robert. The Elements of Typographic Style: Version 3.2. Roberts: Hartley & Marks, 2008. Craig, James, and Irene Korol Scala. Designing with Type: The Essential Guide to Typography. New York: WatsonGuptill Publications, 2006. De Vinne, Theodore Low. The Practice of Typography. New York: The De Vinne Press, 1899. Dowding, Geoffrey. And Introduction to the History of Printing Tyes. London: Wace & Company Ltd., 1961. FontFont, About FontFont. Accessed January 7, 2013. https://www.fontfont.com/about. Headley, Gywn. The Encyclopaedia of Fonts. London: Cassell Illustrated, 2005. Hill, Will. The Complete Typographer. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall, 1995. Jaspert, W. Pincus, W. Turner Berry, and A.F. Johnson. The Encyclopaedia of Typefaces. London: Blandford Press, 1970. Lawson, Alexander. Anatomy of a Typeface. Boston: David R. Godine, 1990. Linotype, History. Accessed January 7, 2013. http:// www.linotype.com/49/history.html. Lupton, Ellen. Thinking With Type: A Critical Guide For Designers, Writers, Editors & Students. New Yok: Princeton Architectural, 2010. McLean, Ruari. The Thames and Hudson Manual of Typography. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd., 1980.
My Fonts, Letraset. Accessed January 7, 2013. http://www.myfonts.com/foundry/Letraset/. My Fonts, ParaType. Accessed January 7, 2013. http://www.myfonts.com/foundry/ParaType/. My Fonts, Robert Bringhurst. Accessed December 29, 2012. http://www.myfonts.com/person/Robert_Bringhurst/. Nettelhorst, Leopold. Schrift Muss Passen: Schriftwahl und Schriftausdruck in der Werbung Handbuch fur Gestalungsarbeit an Webemitteln. Essen: Wirtschaft und Werbung Verlagsgesellschaft mbH., 1959. Solomon, Martin. The Art of Typography: And introduction to Typo.icon.ography. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications, 1986. Strizver, Ilene. Type Rules! The Designers Guide to Professional Typography. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2006. Typographie & Civilisation, Classification Thibaudeau. Last modified 2006. Accessed January 10, 2013. http://caracteres.typographie.org/classification/ thibaudeau.html. Updike, Daniel Berkeley. Printing Types: Their Histories, Forms, and Use. Boston: The Merrymount Press, 1937.

25 Systems For Classifying Typography

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

25 Systems For Classifying Typography

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE PARSONS INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION MAPPING

68 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10011

212 229 6825 piim.newschool.edu

25 Systems for Classifying Typography: A Study in Naming Frequency

PRO MA CES NIP SED ULA TED

GO ANT THI IQU C E

HAN DWR ITING

Typeface Classification, type specimens, type systems, typeface taxonomy, typography

October 2012January 2013

. CENT E 20TH ESQU GROT

TIVE & DECORA DISPLAY

EX FRE OT EFO IC/ RM

SERIF SANS SERIF

DECORATIVE & DISPLAY

ISE INC PHI GLY

LAY DISP DEC

NEA VILI CUR

ETR OM NIS GE DER MO

PLAC REFR EENC ING

ENG STYL ENCI REFR

TER/ KLET BLAC KEN BRO

BLA CKL ETT

T H e V o X ATy P I sys TeM

AN ROM ANTS I VAR

T H e H Is Tory o F PrI N TI N G TyPes

SANS SERIF SERIF

B r I TIs H s TA N d Ards sys TeM

T He A rT o F T y P o Gr A P Hy: A N IN T rod U C T Io N T o T y P o .IC o N .o Gr A P Hy

PR MA OCES NIP SED UL AT ED

T H e e Le M e N Ts oF TyPoG rAPH I C sTyL e

TIVE/ DECORA DISPLAY

G LE- CIN STYFREN RE

PLA C REF EREN CI

T y Po G r A P H I C sys TMes: Pr ACTI Ce & Pro Ced U re

& ATIVE DECOR AY DISPL

ER ETT CKL N BLA ROKE B

COMPU RELATE TER D

L T ICA NIS LYR DER MO

ME CHA TIC NIS

20TH CENTURY GOTHIC

GEO MO METRIC DER NIS T

RIA N-VA NTS

Bartram, Typeforms: A History, 77.

8 Linotype, History. Accessed January 7, 2013. http://www.linotype.com/49/history.html.

You might also like