3 ms·

I don't think it was a great article by any stretch, but you're sounding really foolish. Helvetica and Akzidenz (and Universe/Avenir/Frutiger, Clarendon/Rockwe

by blehn 16y ago

I don't think it was a great article by any stretch, but you're sounding really foolish. Helvetica and Akzidenz (and Universe/Avenir/Frutiger, Clarendon/Rockwell) are plenty different. And yes, there are designers that spend their careers alternating between a few similar typefaces. Just because two typefaces have similarities doesn't mean they both can't be useful in different situations. Clarendon was recently chosen by Pitchfork, purveyors of cool, for their logo. Ruby Tuesday also went through a rebrand with Clarendon within the last year or two. Wells Fargo does fine with it. Modest Mouse and Belle and Sebastian have used it on album covers. Typography is subjective, but what exactly is your problem with it? It's very clearly still relevant. "Why would a designer ever use Avant Garde" That's a pretty ignorant statement. If you look at the portfolios of mondernist designers from the last 5 years, Avant Garde would probably appear as often as anything but Helvetica. I'd expect that someone delivering such harsh criticism would at least be an expert on the subject, but I went to the Matasano homepage and found a hodgepodge of 4 or 5 different sans-serifs, sloppy tracking and leading...no wonder.

tptacek 16y ago
Are you commenting on my taste in typography (trust me, mine is worse than the web site for my software security company, which I didn't do[1]), or the post? (You've got me dead to rights on Avant Garde, but I don't think your case is as solid with Clarendon; isn't Pitchfork using it ironically? Clearly Ruby Tuesday is.) My criticism is about the post. You clearly could write an excellent post like this, and you should. This author didn't. There's no context to any of its selections. There's no information about any of its selections. Some of them (Univers/Avenir/Frutiger, Helvetica/Akzidenz) seem suspect because they're too similar. "Here I've made a collection of every face I've seen used on Underconsideration.com, added 1 sentence to each, and started soaking up the link juice". You can beat up on me --- an avowed non-designer --- all you want, but I'm not the one getting articles like this flung to the top of Google's search results for cash. [1] I wouldn't beat up on our designers too much, since we (a) gave them a wordmark set in Avenir to work with and (b) very haphazardly converted their output to Haml/Sass. Believe me when I say that the people who pay us don't care that much.
- blehn 16y ago
  I'm not really commenting on your taste or the article, but the manner in which you criticized the article. I agree that the article lacked substance and isn't deserving of so many upvotes. However, your comments about specific fonts were made in a matter-of-fact way that suggested you were a designer or typography expert. It gets a bunch of upvotes, and the programmers on here come away from the comments thinking that Clarendon and Avant Garde are irrelevant, etc., when the truth might be the opposite. My comment regarding your website was only to make the point that, suspect as the OP might be, your comments should be taken with a grain of salt as well.
  - tptacek 16y ago
    Yeah, not so fast, font geek. Defend your argument. Seriously, you think Clarendon is a great "back pocket", "top of my tool drawer" typeface for designers to be using? Because Pitchfork and Ruby Tuesday use it? Put a bevel on Ruby Tuesday's mark and you could add a cowboy hat and a lasso to complete their thought. Is there a Clarendon revival I'm missing, or are you just jumping on me because you think I'm bashing the typefaces and not the author of this post? You obviously are an expert, and should have no trouble setting me straight.
    - blehn 16y ago
      Seriously, you think Clarendon is a great "back pocket", "top of my tool drawer" typeface for designers to be using? If I'm theoretically limited to only 25 typefaces, there should be room for a few slab-serifs, and I don't see why Clarendon couldn't be one of them. It's a classic slab-serif in the same way that Helvetica and Akzidenz are classic sans-serifs. I don't think it's great because Pitchfork and Ruby Tuesday use it, I'm saying that it's more relevant than you suggested. Designers, somehow, ARE using it. Maybe there is a Clarendon revival. Don't forget that trends are a big part of graphic design, as they are in any design industry. Helvetica, Avant Garde, Clarendon go in and out of style just like tapered jeans, Ray-Bans, and plaid shirts.
      - deleted 16y ago

by blehn 16y ago

tptacek 16y ago

Are you commenting on my taste in typography (trust me, mine is worse than the web site for my software security company, which I didn't do[1]), or the post? (You've got me dead to rights on Avant Garde, but I don't think your case is as solid with Clarendon; isn't Pitchfork using it ironically? Clearly Ruby Tuesday is.) My criticism is about the post. You clearly could write an excellent post like this, and you should. This author didn't. There's no context to any of its selections. There's no information about any of its selections. Some of them (Univers/Avenir/Frutiger, Helvetica/Akzidenz) seem suspect because they're too similar. "Here I've made a collection of every face I've seen used on Underconsideration.com, added 1 sentence to each, and started soaking up the link juice". You can beat up on me --- an avowed non-designer --- all you want, but I'm not the one getting articles like this flung to the top of Google's search results for cash. [1] I wouldn't beat up on our designers too much, since we (a) gave them a wordmark set in Avenir to work with and (b) very haphazardly converted their output to Haml/Sass. Believe me when I say that the people who pay us don't care that much.

blehn 16y ago
I'm not really commenting on your taste or the article, but the manner in which you criticized the article. I agree that the article lacked substance and isn't deserving of so many upvotes. However, your comments about specific fonts were made in a matter-of-fact way that suggested you were a designer or typography expert. It gets a bunch of upvotes, and the programmers on here come away from the comments thinking that Clarendon and Avant Garde are irrelevant, etc., when the truth might be the opposite. My comment regarding your website was only to make the point that, suspect as the OP might be, your comments should be taken with a grain of salt as well.
- tptacek 16y ago
  Yeah, not so fast, font geek. Defend your argument. Seriously, you think Clarendon is a great "back pocket", "top of my tool drawer" typeface for designers to be using? Because Pitchfork and Ruby Tuesday use it? Put a bevel on Ruby Tuesday's mark and you could add a cowboy hat and a lasso to complete their thought. Is there a Clarendon revival I'm missing, or are you just jumping on me because you think I'm bashing the typefaces and not the author of this post? You obviously are an expert, and should have no trouble setting me straight.
  - blehn 16y ago
    Seriously, you think Clarendon is a great "back pocket", "top of my tool drawer" typeface for designers to be using? If I'm theoretically limited to only 25 typefaces, there should be room for a few slab-serifs, and I don't see why Clarendon couldn't be one of them. It's a classic slab-serif in the same way that Helvetica and Akzidenz are classic sans-serifs. I don't think it's great because Pitchfork and Ruby Tuesday use it, I'm saying that it's more relevant than you suggested. Designers, somehow, ARE using it. Maybe there is a Clarendon revival. Don't forget that trends are a big part of graphic design, as they are in any design industry. Helvetica, Avant Garde, Clarendon go in and out of style just like tapered jeans, Ray-Bans, and plaid shirts.
    - deleted 16y ago