Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: best-loved faces

Expand Messages
  • Gerald Lange
    Dan Thanks for the information. Looks like I need to seriously check this all out. I ve a project in the works with MM Kepler and was dreading the interaction
    Message 1 of 13 , Jan 3, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Dan

      Thanks for the information. Looks like I need to seriously check this
      all out. I've a project in the works with MM Kepler and was dreading
      the interaction in Indy. Looks like it will all work out based on what
      you have provided.

      Thanks again.

      Gerald
      http://BielerPress.blogspot.com




      --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, Dan Franklin <dan@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi, Gerald.
      >
      > >Have you installed a complete MM font (parents and instances) that
      > >works in Indy?
      >
      > Yes.
      >
      > >And wouldn't an instance of an optically mastered font be a
      singular entity?
      >
      > Yes, but read on ...
      >
      > >I'm a bit confused by the statement "you can tell InDesign, by way
      > >of preferences, to automatically select the correct optical size
      > >from an MM font that has an optical axis."
      >
      > If you have 'Automatically Use Correct Optical Size' checked in
      > Preferences, you get the optical size closest to the point size of
      > the type.
      >
      > Here's an example (and an experiment):
      >
      > You have Minion MM Roman installed with these instances, among others:
      >
      > 367 wt 600 wd 10 op (normal weight, slightly wider than normal width,
      > 10-point optical size)
      > 367 wt 600 wd 14 op
      > 367 wt 600 wd 18 op
      > 367 wt 600 wd 24 op
      >
      > Type two 24-pt cap aitches side by side. Swipe one and select
      > 367-600-10; swipe the other and select 367-600-24. If you have
      > 'Automatically Use Correct Optical Size' selected in Preferences,
      > both aitches look identical (because InDesign is using the 367-600-24
      > instance -- even though the font indicator shows Minion MM Roman, 367
      > wt 600 wd 10 op for the first, and Minion MM Roman, 367 wt 600 wd 24
      > op for the second).
      >
      > Now turn off that preference. You will see the 367-600-10 aitch
      > change (for example, the bar and the serifs will thicken, as you
      > would expect with a 10-pt optical size).
      >
      > Turn the preference on again, and the aitches appear identical.
      >
      > >Not sure what you mean by correct optical size (well, I know what a
      > >correct optical size is, but isn't this dependent upon a user
      > >configured instance?).
      >
      > For 20-pt type, InDesign auto-selects 367-600-18; for 22-pt type, it
      > auto-selects 367-600-24; for 21-pt type (exactly halfway between 18
      > and 24), it auto-selects 367-600-18 (the lower optical size value).
      >
      > >Is this capability because of how Fusion treats fonts? Font Explorer
      > >X sure doesn't cater much to a complete MM font (parents and all).
      > >How does this work?
      >
      > I don't know. I use Fusion, which I love, because I used its
      > predecessor, Font Reserve, and I used Font Reserve because it allowed
      > me to classify/search my fonts by traditional designations, like
      > 'Oldstyle', 'Humanist sans', 'Grotesque sans', etc. When I wanted a
      > transitional face for a project (but wasn't sure which one), I didn't
      > have to scroll through Jenson, Caslon, Minion, Bodoni, etc.; I could
      > search for 'Transitional' and immediately see that I could choose
      > from Baskerville, Bell, Caledonia, etc.
      >
      > >I've got Font Agent and Font Explorer X but I gave up on Fusion when
      > >the initial try out app (a year or so ago?) opened up as an Excel
      > >file. Figured if they hadn't figured that out, not worth going much
      > >further with it.
      >
      > That's a bummer. It's better now.
      >
      > Fun to talk type with you.
      >
    • Gerald Lange
      PPL Actually, I was hoping some of the folks involved in the recent letterpress revival, the stationery/invitational card folks, would have responded to this.
      Message 2 of 13 , Jan 3, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        PPL

        Actually, I was hoping some of the folks involved in the recent
        letterpress revival, the stationery/invitational card folks, would
        have responded to this. Truth be told though, I can't really find
        their representation on any of the letterpress lists. Not sure what
        that says. Insular? Competitive? Letterpress is a selling point, but
        no real further, deeper interest?

        Gerald
        http://BielerPress.blogspot.com
      • Lance Williams
        Well, As a stationery printer for over 25 years, and the business for over 73 years, I ll chime in here a little.... I can t say what my personal favorite
        Message 3 of 13 , Jan 4, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Well,

          As a stationery printer for over 25 years, and the business for over 73
          years, I'll chime in here a little.... I can't say what my personal
          favorite faces are, it all depends on what I am working on at the time.
          However, we have always limited out stationery lines to a few specific
          faces for two reasons:

          1: Ease of selling the stationery, as we sell "door to door" through
          school groups, church groups, etc, and by having only a few type styles
          makes it easier, especially for the younger salespeople.

          2: Easier for us, as we don't have to change magazines in our Intertypes
          as we set type. We currently have one Model C with 2 mags with duplex
          faces, giving us a total of 6 usable type styles on that machine, and the
          other Model C has 5 usable type styles. We also use 3 faces on our Ludlow,
          even though we have many more for other uses.

          First Model C: 10 Pt. Helvetica w/italic, 12 Pt. Bernard Fashion w/ Park
          Ave & 12 Pt. Engravers Text w/Typo Roman.

          2nd Model C: 11 Pt. Times Roman w/ Italic, 14 Pt. Waverly w/ italic, 18 pt.
          Vogue Oblique.

          Ludlow: 18 Pt. Society Text, 18 pt. Tempo Light Italic, 24 pt. Coronet

          These are the various faces we have used on our stationery products for
          more than the past 25 years. However, I am currently in the process of
          adding several magazines of mats to offer some new faces to the line to see
          if it will help improve sales. I think our line has become somewhat
          "stale" over the years, and needs some "modernization" to infuse a little
          more life in it...

          Well, have to cut this short, as I have to make/eat breakfast and get to
          work....

          - Lance Williams
          Williams Stationery Co.
          Camden, New York
          APA #785


          > [Original Message]
          > From: Gerald Lange <Bieler@...>
          > To: <PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com>
          > Date: 1/4/2007 2:42:04 AM
          > Subject: [PPLetterpress] Re: best-loved faces
          >
          > PPL
          >
          > Actually, I was hoping some of the folks involved in the recent
          > letterpress revival, the stationery/invitational card folks, would
          > have responded to this. Truth be told though, I can't really find
          > their representation on any of the letterpress lists. Not sure what
          > that says. Insular? Competitive? Letterpress is a selling point, but
          > no real further, deeper interest?
          >
          > Gerald
          > http://BielerPress.blogspot.com
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
        • lisa rappoport
          ... Hi Gerald, As someone who prints invitations, along with other commercial work and my own personal work, the answer seems clear: One s own favorite faces
          Message 4 of 13 , Jan 4, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            >Actually, I was hoping some of the folks involved in the recent
            >letterpress revival, the stationery/invitational card folks, would
            >have responded to this. Truth be told though, I can't really find
            >their representation on any of the letterpress lists. Not sure what
            >that says. Insular? Competitive? Letterpress is a selling point, but
            >no real further, deeper interest?

            Hi Gerald,
            As someone who prints invitations, along with other commercial work and my own personal work, the answer seems clear: One's own favorite faces are generally irrelevant. The customer will select the face, esp. if you're going the polymer plate route, in which case they can choose from whatever digital font, suitable or not, they've ever seen.

            With handset metal type obviously they're limited to what I have, and within that to what I have enough of, in appropriate sizes, for the job at hand. So it's a pre-selected selection.

            My house font has always been Centaur. I'm also very drawn to Garamond, esp. the italic; Bernhard Gothic, esp. the light weight; and some oddities like Greeting Monotone (rarely appropriate, but wonderful in the right usage) and Glamour Light.

            And I confess to some low tastes, like Park Avenue and Typo Upright.

            Best,
            Lisa
            Littoral Press
          • Gerald Lange
            Hi Lisa Well, yes, and no. I process plates for a number of stationery/invitational card folks—some of them quite high end and prolific—and the latter will
            Message 5 of 13 , Jan 4, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Lisa

              Well, yes, and no. I process plates for a number of
              stationery/invitational card folks—some of them quite high end and
              prolific—and the latter will either direct their clients
              appropriately, as designers should (I'd think), or (in regard to favs)
              they may have a line of cards developed in which they are using their
              own preferred faces.

              So, I'd suggest it is not always just what the client demands but
              often how they are directed to what they need. And, I would think, if
              they are coming to you (generic you), they are coming for a specific
              reason, your taste, your expertise, skill, what uniquely you have to
              offer, etc. Yes? No?

              Gerald
              http://BielerPress.blogspot.com



              --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, lisa rappoport <cutvelvet@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > >Actually, I was hoping some of the folks involved in the recent
              > >letterpress revival, the stationery/invitational card folks, would
              > >have responded to this. Truth be told though, I can't really find
              > >their representation on any of the letterpress lists. Not sure what
              > >that says. Insular? Competitive? Letterpress is a selling point, but
              > >no real further, deeper interest?
              >
              > Hi Gerald,
              > As someone who prints invitations, along with other commercial work
              and my own personal work, the answer seems clear: One's own favorite
              faces are generally irrelevant. The customer will select the face,
              esp. if you're going the polymer plate route, in which case they can
              choose from whatever digital font, suitable or not, they've ever seen.
              >

              >
            • juliemackenzie2003
              Hi Gerald and Lisa- I am a custom invitation designer and also print for designers as well. I agree with Gerald, I tend to steer my clients in the directions
              Message 6 of 13 , Jan 5, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Gerald and Lisa-

                I am a custom invitation designer and also print for designers as
                well.

                I agree with Gerald, I tend to steer my clients in the directions of
                my tried and true typefaces. I have in my early days, tried
                different faces because it was what they liked. Often to my dismay.
                They liked the end result, but I fussed through the entire print
                process.

                When time allows, I will print for an occasional designer. Not
                always liking the design and type faces. I did one time get quite a
                surprise on a typeface that I thought was horrible. Hard to read and
                letters were not what I thought (in digital format) Yet when I
                printed it. It looked quite lovely. That was Escrita Principal.

                anyways, long story short. What the client wants is often what you
                will recommend within their design style.

                Thanks,
                Julie MacKenzie
                www.mackenziepress.com

                > Well, yes, and no. I process plates for a number of
                > stationery/invitational card folks—some of them quite high end and
                > prolific—and the latter will either direct their clients
                > appropriately, as designers should (I'd think), or (in regard to
                favs)
                > they may have a line of cards developed in which they are using
                their
                > own preferred faces.
                >
                > So, I'd suggest it is not always just what the client demands but
                > often how they are directed to what they need. And, I would think,
                if
                > they are coming to you (generic you), they are coming for a specific
                > reason, your taste, your expertise, skill, what uniquely you have to
                > offer, etc. Yes? No?
                >
                > Gerald
                > http://BielerPress.blogspot.com
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.