From The Archives ~ Topics: typography
They're not fonts!
“What font is used on the Absolut Vodka bottles”?
“Can you identify the font used in the new Star Wars movie”?
“Do you recognize the font in the attached PDF“?
I get questions like these daily. I don’t mind them. Fact is, I enjoy the challenge. What I don’t like, however, is the nomenclature. It seems that just about everyone is using the word “font” when they are referring to a typeface. “Fonts” and “typefaces” are different things. Graphic designers choose typefaces for their projects but use fonts to create the finished art.
Typefaces are designs like Baskerville, Gill Sans or Papyrus. Type designers create typefaces. Today they use software programs like Fontographer or Font Lab to create the individual letters. A few still draw the letters by hand and then scan them into a type design application.
Fonts are the things that enable the printing of typefaces. Type foundries produce fonts. Sometimes designers and foundries are one and the same, but creating a typeface and producing a font are two separate functions.
A little history may help. John Baskerville created the typeface design that bears his name. Creating the design was a multi-stage process. First, he cut the letters (backwards) on the end of a steel rod. The completed letter is called a “punch.” Next, Baskerville took the punch and hammered it into a flat piece of soft brass to make a mold of the letter. A combination of molten lead, zinc and antimony was then poured into the mold and the result was a piece of type the face of which was an exact copy of the punch. After Baskerville made punches for all the letters he would use and cast as many pieces of type as he thought he would need, he put the type into a typecase. The resulting collection of letters was a font of Baskerville type.
Over the years, there have been hand-set fonts of Baskerville type, machine-set fonts, phototype fonts, and now digital fonts. Currently, there are TrueType and PostScript Type1 fonts of the Baskerville typeface. There are Latin 1 fonts of Baskerville used to set most of the languages in Western Europe and Greek and Cyrillic fonts that enable the setting of these languages. All these fonts are of the Baskerville typeface design.
Maybe it's OK for the folks that set the neighborhood church's newsletter to call them fonts; but those of us who claim to be typographers and graphic designers should refer to our tools by the correct name. So, what font is used on the Absolut Vodka bottles? I don't know. But I can tell you that the name “Absolute” is set in the typeface Futura Extra Bold Condensed.
-
fonts are neat, i use them. they are called fontfaces.
-
....yeah, but I bet you refer to your vacum cleaner as a' Hoover' and your portable stereo as a'walkman'...
-
a font is a quantity, not an entity.
-
Comment for Eeda-Bae Biout: you seriously dont get it, do you?
-
Unless you set the type - can you be absolutely sure?
-
I am taking a typography class right now and what I'd like to know is the difference between font and style. The article makes it sound as if the typeface is the entire set of letters and punctuation originally and any variation of this original type is a font. Is this right I thought they were called styles. Or is this just more words for the same thing?
-
dear mr. haley, thank you for this brief but informative piece. next time i need to make this argument, i'll just hand folks a copy because i couldn't say it as clearly. in our digital era, it's understandable how the meaning of "fonts" and "typefaces" have become blurred when you no longer have to handle tangible pieces of lead but simply stick in a disk and load a file. the "font" is in the computer; the "face" is in the design.
-
Absolut Rubbish Mr H! A typeface is the family design (Futura), a font is the variant design (Futura Extra Bold Condensed). You're confusing rather than clarifying.
-
Does it really matter what we call them? I think we have better uses of time than to discuss the difference between a font and a typeface. Get back to work!
-
I thought a font was a specific size and weight of a typeface? Such as..."12pt. Bodoni Bold". No?
-
I agree with the comment made earlier about a typeface defining a family design or an individual member of a family, but I see a font as the digital 'appliance' used by computers for typesetting (i.e., printer and screen fonts). The term 'font' seems prevailent as a modern day terminology, not used even to describe traditional design variants.
-
I consider myself farely well versed in most facets of type and design, and you, Mr. H, managed to confuse me further. No need to write that entire article when it can be summed up in just three lines as Mr. SomeoneWhoKnows illustrated. Look at the confusion you have caused with all these poor people trying to understand such a simple concept.
-
Your article has given me a better understanding, or at least a different view of typography and the use of typepography. Thanks. BTW...the floating menu bar on the top is pretty distracting.
-
I couldn't of said it better!
-
I've heard this gripe a thousand times and it all seems to do with what kind of background you have. I think that as we progress into a more digital age, the word "font" will be used over "typeface" just as Kleenex is used over "facial tissue".
-
Yes, traditionally type style is referred to as the typeface. But try and refer to it as typeface to your printer and he will say, "You mean font, right?" So because of the growing digital age of computers for the lay person we refer to it as font. Why not go as far as only refering line widths in Picas because point size if for typefaces. As long as your message is understood then what is the big deal.
-
I fell into this site by fate. My friend, Mr. H has it right; you typographic morons are funny. Design on!
-
I agree with a couple of the other folks here... I think you're splitting hairs here. I appreciate the use of proper terminology, but this example here seems to depend on usage. If I were cranking a traditional press out in my garage, I might be concerned with typefaces and fonts-- but I do work on my computer, and e-mail files to my printer. Typefaces, as you yourself point out, are a tool of old-fashioned printing. When I can e-mail a digital file to my printer, and he ships me a finished piece, he wants the fonts I used, not the dies that I cut in my workshop. Like Nicole said: try telling your service bureau that you're not using fonts, and you can expect a befuddled expression in return. As designers, we should be much more concerned with the terrible grammer and usage of the English language that is visible in print everywhere... does ANYBODY out there remember when and when not to use an apostrophe anymore?
-
Correction – (just to add to the insightful comments on this subject) “They're not fonts!” – apostrophe, not measurement indicator – “They’re not fonts” I believe is the correct way to type it.
-
First, thanks to Allan Haley for fighting the good fight. Thanks also to Nick. It’s heartening to see that someone still does care about apostrophes. To Matt: how do you know that Someone Who Knows is a Mr.? Some people are still confused: what you send your printer IS a font, so don’t worry. Finally, I am appalled at the grammar and spelling in most of these comments. On a site like this one, you’d think people would know better.
-
Allen, I bet you wear a black turtle neck. Lighten up. Tammi
-
Nick, I wasn't actually referring to this piece, I just meant look around you, and everywhere (billboards, magazine ads, etc.) you'll find that people don't seem to understand the simple use of our friend the apostrophe. Most typesetters today seem to think that plural automatically means possesive-- of course, the real problem here is that folks just don't remember any of their grammer lessons, because they obviously don't even realize they're doing it. Pay attention, and you'll see more "'s" out of place than you would believe.
-
Nice article and a good educational piece!! It reminds me of a similar "revision of the dictionary" which I often see. Having been trained first as a commercial photographer and then moving into other design fields, I am sensitive to what is often called a 'silhouette'. This mistake on the part of a particular designer nearly caused me a major re-shoot. He emailed me the details for a job, expressing that he needed a 'silouette' portrait of a local author. Rather than just giving him what he literally asked for, I called to verify. (Good move!) What I learned that he wanted was a photograph of the subject with a totally washed-out, white background. The word that designers, including many professional design magazines, need to learn is 'high-key'. Ask for a 'silouette' and you may get what my first grade teacher did when she placed a bright light source on one side of me, pinned a black piece of paper to the wall, and traced my outline with a white pencil. Not what designers usually mean by 'silouette'. Unfortunately this is not the only situation where designers and photographers use different dictionaries. The collaberative job is already wrought with enough challenges, but when we speak another language the task gets much more difficult -- and potentially devastating. So, at the next opportunity ask for 'high-key' photography, and your shooter will appreciate the clarity of your communication. - Steve
-
Well, first I think is quite funny that the people that are complaining about today's grammAr don't know how to spell it.
As to the article, I understand where he is coming from, but this is how things change and words take on double meanings. I mean, do you honestly believe that many of the words we use today would started out having two different definitions? It is the beauty of language, the evolution and growth of a word or a phrase. Some things pass, and maybe they shouldn't, but you can't fight it. So learn to love the fluidity of our tongues and relax. -
Thanks for the clarification. I teach my students that there is in fact a difference between typefamily, typeface and font, but it really confuses them when the computer incorrectly uses the language...also an issue with the word gutter.... your explanation is clear and I will be sharing it with them tomorrow morning. Sometimes I think I am the only one who cares about such issues, so I am pleased that it rates space on the AIGA website. Thanks. Connie
-
Wow, I never knew that this was such a sore subject for everybody. I've graduated from VCU with Bachelor's degree in Graphic Design and I am sorry to admit that I am still not 100% sure of the difference between a "typeface" and a "font."
After reading everyone's comments I decided to put an end to my prolonged ignorance in this department. I looked up the definitions for these words on dictionary.com. This is what I've come up with:
FONT =
1. A set of images representing the characters from some particular character set in a particular size and typeface.
2. A basin or stone vessel in which water is contained for baptizing.
TYPEFACE =
The style or design of a font. Other independent parameters are size, boldness, and obliqueness.
Granted that we can confidently dismiss definition #2 for "FONT," this clears things up a little more...hopefully...
To everyone: I ran a spellcheck in Quark, then copied and pasted this text in here, AND all my apostrophes are correct! This is a tough crowd.
To Matt from Richmond: I had a teacher named Matt at VCU, he wrote Type Detective Story.
Are you him? -
I was taught that a typeface is a design such as Univers‚ Futura‚ Helvetica‚ etc. A font is a small portion of a typeface‚ such as Univers 55 Roman and Univers 45 Light. Typefaces are composed of individual fonts‚ which are slight variations on the original design of the typeface. Like I said‚ that’s the way I was taught. I think it is a common misconception that people make when using the nomenclature “font” or “typeface.” As a designer we should always be educating ourselves and forums such as this one are great places to learn new things‚ or find out how people have learned in different manners than yourself.
-
The article was cool. The reactions are better. I learned to diffientiate between a typeface and a font. It resonates the typical masses' confusion towards the functions of an architect and an engineer.
What strikes me are some of the people who proclaims the author "spliting hair" when the author tries to guide us to say what we mean and mean what we say. People who made the said proclamation obviously did not know the differences before. However, instead of learning it and move on being smarter, they hide their ignorances behind these ignorant accusations. With so many cultures striving to keep their languages alive, why are we being so dismissive of our own? -
Wha'the font?
-
In English, font has two different meanings. Each one of them has a different etymology. Its first meaning comes from the old Irish fans, which in turn was taken from the Latin fons. However, in the second meaning, the one to which this article refers, came into English, from the French fonte, which does not mean font, but rather casting. Thus, fonte de fer is translated as cast iron. This is because the letters of the old typography invented by Gutenberg were made of iron cast into molds. Hence, a font is a vessel which holds or contains type. Typeface refers to the design of a specific type.
-
I guess the bottom line here is, if you want to impress those in the know, use the word typeface when referring to the style and font when referring to the collection...
Honestly, understanding is the more important issue. I liked the photographer's story as it illustrates that the responsibility of comprehension rests with the receiver and not the vehicle. That is to say, that if I don't understand what someone means by font/typeface, it is my responsibility to get more information to clarify.
If, as a student, you don't understand something and decide to keep quiet, you've invited ignorance as your cohort. Take the responsibility to get more information in the classroom of life if someone's message is unclear.
Surely Mr. Haley knew what the querent meant by font and I'm not 100% convinced that the request was incorrectly put. Especially when one considers that the querent may have been asking the question in order to obtain the font for use on a project.
More importantly, would the final response have been different had the querent used the word typeface rather than font?
Perhaps the answer to that question lies more in one's perception of the querent than the importance of the distinction.
Sincerely,
Ken Rounds -
Thanks for your much needed clarification on typefaces and fonts. Seems all our language is getting a bit "mushy." I also cringe when I hear people refer to draperies (a noun) as drapes (a verb). It's everywhere!
-
I understand your view on this font and typeface subject. I'm a graphic designer and as some of you will know we are people who are 'supposed' to think outward and beyond others. I understand how you are upset about other creative people around you, slipping away into another speech zone. But should you not consider and apply the thought of the Darwin theory to this small but jagged question? The world is moving, and fast! The ways of communicating are changing every week! Take text messaging on your mobile phone for example and how it alters your way of writing. You intergr8 numbers & words to enable the msge 2b shorter. Is this misuse of the word 'font' just another mutation of speech in the modern human?
-
first, hi matt and olga. Matt W. (author of that type detective story) and cohorts at VCU would all surely agree, that this is an oftentimes confused subject. One that i entertain in the office often, and sometimes instigate just to see what the 'common' understanding may be. if you care, my breakdown is this, and i assure you, i have spent some time reading about it. the typefamily would be Univers. The typeface would be Univers 55. The Font, Fount, Fonte, would be Univers 55, 8pt. and this melds most closely to the origins (cast types of one size). it is tricky when one starts to realize many inbetween standard size letterforms are rendered on the computer screen thanks to programs like ATM, or Suitcase, or your manager of choice. now, the small issue on usage of curly quotes verses straight quotes (single and or double) can be either. one should not mix them, one should not use some to quote text, and the same type to indicate measure in the same bodycopy/document. to liken the colloquial usages of words like xerox, kleenex, and font is not incorrect. it is the designers responsibility to, as long as you understand it, to explain where misusages occur, though. i have to say, i like this forum
-
With this endless babble, we are taking away much needed resources to be used in the fight to clarify the term "vellum". That term has now mistakenly been used altogether too frequently for describing transluscent paper (i.e. scrapbooking paper). Join me in the fight to eliminate this injustice!
-
hi olga :-)
no, i don't think that's the matt w. you're thinking of that posted on this site. he has better manners than that.
i spend a lot of time corrrecting my students' misuse of the terms 'font' and 'typeface' often. (gosh, olga, i'm surprised that you still confuse them - ben day at vcu made that point very clear to me when i was there earning my bfa!) :-)
i feel that often students just don't read their textbook (typographic design: form and communication). i can't say i blame many of them, it's a pretty wordy read that could be simplified. however, if in fact the terms 'font' and 'typeface' were interchangeable, they wouldn't warrant two separate definitions...
font - a set of characters of the same size and style containing all the letters, numbers, and marks needed for typesetting. (gosh, this would explain why we call the software we install on our computers 'fonts' eh?)
typeface - the DESIGN of alphabetical and numerical characters unified by consistent visual properties.
in other words, we use 'typeface' when we are describing the visual characteristics that exist within a 'font'. now if 'typeface' and 'font' meant the same thing, than i wouldn't be able to write that sentence just now would i? :-D
fun conversation. sorry i didn't catch on to it sooner. -
I am picky, but on those bottles there is a custom lettering. The letters have really small serifs which Futura lacks.
-
Word usage often changes over time. For example, "toolbox." Taking great care in one's craft (the point to which this essay seems to refer, however obliquely) is a separate matter. And certainly not a small one.
-
Typefonts
Fontface
Facefont
Fonttype -
The story was great, Allan. Wow!
-
Too often there are examples of declining standards. In the UK we constantly see reference to American English in e.mail addresses - slash when we actually mean stroke and of course font when we mean foUnt !
-
is the font in star wars arial narrow? right before i decided to look up the history of fonts, i was thinking what font was used in star wars, and why.
-
Oh joy, one of my own hobby horses! I was a pressman long ago. But I would argue that that the difference between a font and a typeface began to blur well before the appearance of word-processing. With offset printing one no longer dealt with type as an object, but rather as an image. When lead was replaced by a picture, a font and a typeface were experienced as more or less the same thing. Still, well said, Mr. Haley.
-
Fonts, letterforms, typefaces, and strokes are just some of the words that puzzle the community. Reading this article was pleasing because it identifies the similarities and differences between that of a typeface and font. Where I differ is on the quote you made:
“Maybe it's OK for the folks that set the neighborhood church's newsletter to call them fonts;”
What I experienced by this, I once was apart of that community that had the perception that letterforms were fonts. Nobody ever corrected me until I attended Digital and Media design. Excited to know the correct way, I made sure other people did not make that same mistake. I feel that people that know the accurate information should correct people so they are more knowledgeable of there mistakes. How would you feel if you were misinformed? -
And I can tell you, it's "Absolut" not "Absolute" regardless of the font or typeface, the brand has a spelling separate from it's English homonym.
-
Baskerville didn't do the punchcutting. It was done by John Handy. See Bringhurst p. 216.
-
my god - did anyone actually read the article above. fonts are files found on a computer that makes a typeface available to a user! read the article again slowly then you will understand.
its kind of like the difference between a DVD disc and the film that is on the DVD. Star Wars is a typeface, the disc is a font...
oh please... -
JeSUS KERN ME! Listen TYPEDORKS I'll get my hunting knife and cut you open like a sleeping bag full of red eels.
-
Absolut! Perfetto.
-
Esperfonto describes it like this:
Typeface: is the design of the alphabet--the shape of the letters that make up the typestyle. The letters, numbers, and symbols that make up a design of type. So when you say “Arial” or “Goudy” you’re talking about a set of letters in a specific style.
Font: is the digital file that contains/describes the typeface. Think of the font as a little piece of software that tells the computer and printer how to display and print the typeface.
I think its saying the same thing as this article but just makes it easier to understand.
Is it wrong?! -
It's amazing how in the past it took so much effort to create a letter of a word. But now we have advanced technology that we can do anything. I remember for an assignment we had to create a typeface the old fashion way. With a good pencil, ruler, and a durable eraser. It was really challenging, but it taught me alot.
-
So let me get this straight. A font holds a typeface.
A typeface is within a font. So if I had a font I would essentially have the typeface.
So if i ask, "what font did they use?" then someone could still understand what I was asking because you need a font to actually use the typeface and the name of the typeface is still part of the name of the font....am I right about that???
The two words font and typeface clearly have different meanings, but it seems in the context of computer software they can easily substitute each other without confusion.
So for professionalism sake know your history.
But for pete's sake don't sweat it if you use the word font instead of typeface.
Chances are you really are asking someone if they have the FONT!!!
But maybe you should really say, "do you have a font of the typeface _____ ?"
You might revert back to the incorrect usage of the word font as merely a faster way to get to the point.
HA HA!!! -
Wow. Four years' worth of comments. Now that's something to be proud of ...
Another example of an an article that has been developed and furthered by users' comments. Not to denigrate the original article though!
Anyone skimming to the bottom of this page should really read every line & comment; once you've read the lot, it'll all make sense (I came here to find out the difference between fonts and typefaces, and ended up 'getting it' at some point during the comments.)
Great work everybody!! :-) -
I studied graphic design back in the days before we had desktop computers. my teach was the designer of the award-winning typeface called "Vivaldi". I find Mr. Haley's article accurate and clarifying, that is, the typeface is the design of the type, what it looks like, the font is the means to the end. Still to this day, I will ask, "what typeface would we like to use" and frequently get a glazed-over stare from the questionee. I wonder, have they ever even heard the word "typeface" now that "font" means everything to do with lettering, typesetting, type design, and so on. it is philosophically incorrect to say that now we can call typefaces "fonts" because we use the word "kleenex" to mean facial tissue. these are two totally different issues. in the case of "kleenex" we're talking about a brand name of tissue" . When we refer to a typeface name like "Vivaldi" or "Baskervill" we're talking about the name of a typeface and what it looks like, and when you are talking about the "font" you are talking about the use of it, how it is taken from the abstract to the practical application. If this was a valid analogy (typeface interchangeable with tissue) then you would have to be able to say that the choice of typeface (what it looks like) is equal to the use of it (how you get it into print, or in the case of the kleenex, what you do with it, and how the final effect is achieved, that is the used kleenex is thrown away, presumably).
I am all for calling a "spade a spade", a "typeface a typeface" and no, "a rose by any other name would still be a rose" is only true if it is a rose you are naming, but if it is a daisy......well........ -
Hi everybody. I've been in the graphics industry for 19 years. In that time I've witnessed the growing popularity of the term 'font'. I've found the simplest way to explain this misunderstanding is to think of a font as a tool and a typeface as a design. After understanding this, the rest is easy to sort out.
-
What does it mean by the term "lead" in regards to typeface.
-
Hmm....I think this story sounds like one of those things that might be an old convention being replaced by a new convention.
Probably since around the emergence of desktop publishing, "design" has become less of an exclusive skill for "designers" so now, it's kind of like home DJ's and musicmakers using programs like garageband or fruityloops who don't know the so-called proper terms for things. These new groups of people will probably just make their own terms, or misuse "proper" terms, and whether we like it or not, these new terms will be the new convention.
The word "typeface" is probably different in spanish, so what does it matter what we call it? I think as long as the real designers know the difference between the phenomenon of a designed typeface, and the digital/molded object of a font, everything will be A OK.
Let the DIY'ers call them what they please. Just don't let them claim to be designers, please. -
I will call them typefaces from now on.. Thanks.
-
I learned to set type on a Quadratek system in 1986. "And what typeface would you like that set in?" I would ask my client. Having an intense and immediate dislike for Times Roman, (new, old or any variation thereof)I would show them the sample sheet of typefaces and lay my hand over the "T" section. I would show Mr. Green how lovely the "G" was in Goudy Bold Italic. Mr. Smith, (a persnickety soul) demanded a list of no less than a dozen ampersand styles. My fonts were disks that I inserted into a drive. In 1999 I started a little desktop publishing business. I bought $75 worth of fonts (a disk) from a well-known type library. As a typesetter, I consider the word "font" to be a tangible object, something to "enable the printing of typefaces". So I agree with Mr. Haley. A typeface is the whole family of a given design and the typestyle is the individual aspect, such as bold or italic of a particular face. I think the word "font" has become so popularly misused because it has 4 letters and "typeface" has 8. The modern mind has such a fondness for expediency, and four-letter words!! It's been five years since this topic was begun and really, quite adequately explained by Mr. Haley. If my comments added anything to the discussion, let us continue on for another five years!
-
I really enjoyed reading the article. I am in Advanced Typography right now and learning more about typefaces and fonts and the history behind both of them.
-
What I would like is screen fonts to appear the same as when printed. I prefer to use my ancient Mac to type on (I know which keys to use for real quote marks, em-dashes etc). I have no idea how to get them using MS Windows, but I use the PC to convert .ps to .pdf (some printed). Do I need the same fonts on the PC to get correct postscript conversion?
Could I purchase your black turtle neck sweater? -
To all who have commented and to Mike (10/27/02) in particular:
Be it font or typeface or type family, the proper use of type requires the proper understanding of language. The proper understanding of language is evident in how it is used. One of the foremost indicators of this is knowledge of spelling as a means of definition. Therefor, if one uses the word grammar, one should know how to spell it. Laziness in spelling and punctuation is an indicator of laziness of thought. Yes, it matters. -
-
AIGA should purchase billboard space in NYC and San Francisco differentiating "font" from "typeface." It does make a difference. You wouldn't say "How many hands am I holding up?" when you mean "fingers."
-
Question about what does "lead" mean in typography. Simply put it is the space between lines of type. Originally thin strips of lead, (metal) that was placed in between lines of metal type as it was set. Negative leading refers to the leading or space between lines being less than the set point size of the type being set. Knowing that the point size of the type is the distance from the Ascenders to the Aescenders and not the cap height of the letters.
-
You seem to create some kind of ambiguity, however your contribution is refreshing everyone’s understanding and information of the proper use of font and typeface.
-
Regarding this excerpt from above:
“So if i [sic] ask, ‘what font did they use?’ then someone could still understand what I was asking because you need a font to actually use the typeface and the name of the typeface is still part of the name of the font…. [sic] am I right about that??? [sick]”
It’s not a question of understanding, it’s a question of preciseness. When I was in college, we use to have people running around calling desktop computers “hard drives”. When they pointed at the computer and said “hard drive”, it’s not that I didn’t understand what they were talking about, but it certainly signaled that we wouldn’t be having an in-depth discussion regarding CPU architecture.
A layman does not understand the proper language is forgivable, but if you work in and around type (e.g., design), and you use imprecise language, I would have to question what else about your practice is imprecise.
It’s like a car mechanic telling you they have to remove the “thingy” because it “looks sort of gross”. -
I read about two-thirds of the comments before giving up. None that I read mentioned what had to occur before this discussion could take place. Some low-level employee at Microsoft who didn't know the difference between "face" and "font" chose "font" because it sounded more technical and nerdier. Had that person chosen the correct word, "font" would have remained an obscure term used only by a few people in the printing industry.
-
Im studying graphic design and its sad to see so many working designers who dont know basic foundational design. Yes the differances may apear to be practically frivolous...but they are differances non the less. And come on people arent the little details in design what make it good? To understand the history of design and its technical aspects is an advantage to a designer. Dont make me say it...."learn from the past to gain in the future"
Chris you said it right (and in an easier to understand way, the artical was a bit wordy) -
so whatthefont.com should technically be whatthetypeface.com?
-
thanxs i needed it for my roject.dude, rock on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
i thought fonts were those free font families you can download. And typefaces are just the original typefaces that have already existed or still being created today. Because if I wanna use let's say Century Gothic, but then italicize it, it becomes a font, ALTHOUGH it is still the true form of Century Gothic?? Highly confusing. I say we go for "fontfaces" which someone mentioned.
-
As designers we should all know that the message is more important than the medium, but that the medium is still important. Therefore, we should take care to speak as clearly as we can, and if we can manage it we should also speak correctly. If someone understands "font" better than they understand "typeface" then just say "font". You can enlighted them if they ask, or you can enlighten them even though they didn't ask, and continue to propagate the stereotype that designers are pretentious.
-
Holly, just because you're a graphic designer doesn't mean that you shouldn't know how to write a grammatical sentence with proper spelling and punctuation.
-
It is wonderful that this debate? has continued for so long. I have been working as a designer for over thirty five years I am now teaching Graphics as well. When I was at college I was still able to hand set type and had access to both Monotype and Linotype machines. I believe the typeface is the design and nowadays the font is the software that produces the postscript output.
To set off another discussion as someone who was used Photoshop from day one, I would like to rant briefly about the people who continually confuse dpi and ppi. It seems even the scanner manufacturers are unable to discern the difference. Even more than the sloppy language used used for fonts the difference between dpi and ppi can be critical since one is the measure of printer resolution and the other image resolution. I could never trust a designer or printer who did not understand the difference! -
Funny and absolutely true story... this exact argument came up the other day between 2 designers about whether Helvetica was a font or typeface so they decided to arm wrestle over it. Long story short...The loser ended up in the emergency room with a broken arm. Oh, if only they had come here first.
-
Wow. This conversation remains strong. Five years strong!
-
Hmmm...do I sense a generation gap here? I work with editors all day long and designers are more 'big picture' thinkers than editors...well, usually. I definitely think some people need to take a chill pill or go for a run:)
-
I was telling my boss to put a certain typeface somewhere (I forget the convorsation) he says, "what face, huh?". I say, then...the font. OH!
-
Hi,
A typeface would be Futura.
A font would be 12 point Futura.
Back in the days of metal type, printers had cases of each font (12 point Futura, for example). The cases contained all of the letters, punctuation marks and symbols for each point size of each typeface.
They had a case for each font: 8, 9, 10, 12, etc. point size of Futura and any other typeface they had in their shop. The Capital letters were kept in an upper case and the small letters were kept in a lower case.
The two words aren't synonymous, but most people today (except most graphic designers) don't know the difference. -
The reason that every computer and software application in the world has a "Font" menu -- as opposed to a "Typeface" menu-- may be rather pragmatic.
Remember the first Macontosh? Remember how small the screen was? Screen real estate was at a premium; every pixel counted. "Font" takes up much less space on a menubar than "Typeface" does. Just as the Mac cemented Helvetica as the worldwide standard for a sans, so did it, perhaps, with the substitution of "font" for "typeface."
However, for the life of me, I can't recall where I read this theory. Perhaps Susan Kare had a hand in it? We know that Steve Jobs has a soft spot for typography, so it's clear that he meant no evil when including type choice as part of the original Mac concept. Maybe, at the end of the day, good intentions were scrapped to accommodate physical restrictions. -
I just read this article and decided to do a little research myself. So I got out my type book and a dictionary and behold..."SomeoneWhoKnows" is close but the actual definition of a "font" is "a complete assortment of type of one style and size" like Helvetica Neue. A "typeface" is "a specific size and style of type within a type family" like Helvetica Neue Light Extended. :)
-
This explanation from Heofler & Frere-Jones is the best explanation I've come across and recognizes, without being so judgmental, the merging of the two terms, font and typeface, as a natural evolution in modern application.
"In the days of metal type, a "typeface" was a particular design for an alphabet, and a "font" was the manifestation of that design as a single batch of printing types. A printer who wanted to use the Franklin Gothic typeface would order a set of fonts for each size in which they were needed: perhaps one font of 24 point Franklin Gothic, another font of 18 point, and three or four fonts of 12-point, just to make sure there was always an ample supply of letters. (Like the rubber stamp kit you had as a kid, fonts contained only a fixed number of each letter, which were provided in proportion to their frequency.)
Since alphabets are now recorded digitally, they can be resized at will, and never run out of letters. As a result, the words "typeface" and "font" have come to be used interchangeably. You can sometimes detect vestiges of the old practice, when people use "typeface" to mean a particular design, and "font" to refer to the digital file that embodies that design. One often speaks of "choosing a typeface," but "installing a font on your computer." -
Here's how I would explain the problem with computer terminology.
I'm using Font book. It's full of fonts. It's full of fonts because they're all digital files. Now, when I go into InDesign, I choose a typeface. While browsing the fonts, they're just technical bits of information. But when I'm designing, the information is applied as a visual style of type, and it's a typeface.
So yes, a computer having a folder called "Fonts" is accurate, but when you type something, you're looking at a typeface. -
Richard von Typenstein commented:
"One of the foremost indicators of this is knowledge of spelling as a means of definition. Therefor, if one uses the word grammar, one should know how to spell it. Laziness in spelling and punctuation is an indicator of laziness of thought."
It's amusing you wrote this, seeing as you MISSPELLED "therefor" !
And in reply to the rest of you:
Why on earth are you all continuing to explain the same thing, over and over? Several earlier comments have already made the distinction quite clear!
Weirdos. -
So which is it ! I'm now so confused. OSX calls em Fonts then The Bold and italics options are called typefaces
Photoshop just calls them font family and font style. My Friend, I think you lose to the almighty Adobe and OSX conventions then. -
My understanding in typography, a font is the overall design for a set of characters. It describes the size, weight, and spacing of a character and shouldn't be confused with a typeface, which is a more general term. What i really don't understand is what's the difference between Letters and Fonts? Can somebody explain!
-
Fonts are the cookie cutters and the typefaces are the cookies!
-
Letters are the cookies. Fonts are the cookie cutters.
I have read the thread and found it pretty enlightening. There seems to be a good understanding that what we call a typeface is a named embodiment of style. One comment did disturb me -- and opens another can of worms:
“Because if I wanna use let's say Century Gothic, but then italicize it, it becomes a font, ALTHOUGH it is still the true form of Century Gothic?”
That is the difference between form and style, which, at last among my students, are frequently confused. Perhaps I am too particular on this issue, but form should be a word reserved to discussions of fundamental shape and pattern, and style applied to description of how a particular form is rendered. -
I completely sympathize with Mr. Haley's comments (of more than five years ago!), but I think we should accept that the toothpaste is out of the tube. We are not going to get legions of computer users to say "typeface" instead of "font." (But we should be very concerned about presidents who say "nucular.")
And I wouldn't come down hard on software engineers and digital type foundries for their role in the linguistic shift. They had to name the type files something, and "font" was the logical choice.
Since Day 1 of Postscript fonts, there were screen fonts and printer fonts. In two senses, these names were consistent with the historical definition of a font as an instance of a design. First, given the design of the early Mac OS, it was necessary to have one instance of the design for screen display (this was before Adobe Type Manager came along to rasterize type on the fly on screen) and a paired instance of the design for processor in the laser printer. This bifurcation of a typeface had no historical precedent, but calling each part a font made sense in the way that the first automobiles were called horseless carriages.
Second, screen font files were actually provided as "font suitcases," because each suitcase contained hand-edited bitmap representations of the typeface at (usually) 10-, 12-, 14-, 18-, and 24-point sizes. (Does anyone remember Font/DA Mover?) Those size-specific bitmap sets were the true screen fonts, and a font in that digital context is exactly analogous to a font in the metal-type context (a drawer of type of the same face, style and size).
But the printer (vector/outline) fonts were scalable to any size for output, and therein lies the reason why font lost its size-specific definition. Later came single-file TrueType and OpenType fonts. So it's not hard to fathom how we got to the current state of affairs, with font being a synonym for typeface.
I agree that font menus should have been called typeface menus, since the options were things like Baskerville Bold Italic, not 18-point Baskerville Bold Italic (size being selected from a separate menu). But if people are licensing and installing "font files," then a "font" menu makes sense for consistent user interface.
There are the few digital typeface families in which there are different drawings intended for use at different sizes, just like there were different cuts (literally) of typefaces at different size in the metal days. An example of this is ITC Bodoni by Sumner Stone et al, which is available in three size-specific "versions," as they are called on the Stone Type Foundry site: Six, Twelve, and Seventy-Two. These versions could instead be called fonts, but there is nothing stopping us from setting ITC Bodoni Six at 273-point size. So there goes the traditional definition of font even when we're trying to be traditional.
Let's use "typeface" as the secret handshake among friends. -
Fount anyone????
-
Its good to know that I'm not the only one that feels that way when someone says "font" instead of typeface...
Every time a designer says "font" someone beats up an old lady. -
Which do people use when dealing with a client? "Typeface", to show you're a GD pro, or "font" so they know what you're talking about?
-
So what's the definition of a font? Or really what I want to know, is how would you explain the difference between a typeface and a font?
I usually just tell my clients the word "text" and they know what I'm talking about. Most of my clients are musicians and I make posters for them.
Last night, one of my clients emailed me back my background art design with his dirty "font/copy/nonsense" or whatever you want to call it stuck so violatingly between my layers, how the heck did he do that when I sent him a jpeg??
Turns out, I was mistaken, he had added additional layers on top, the little bugger thinks he's so smart because he can find the opacity switch on PS. He just put the offending gaudy type in there and pained over some of it so it lookd like it was stuck in there. Then sends it to me like "hey maw, look what I did" Nice fingerpainting, kiddo.
I still felt a bit violated, so I stayed up all night creating an acceptable product, caus there is no way he's gonna tell me how to do it right.
whew.
good night.
L -
""In the days of metal type, a "typeface" was a particular design for an alphabet, and a "font" was the manifestation of that design as a single batch of printing types. A printer who wanted to use the Franklin Gothic typeface would order a set of fonts for each size in which they were needed: perhaps one font of 24 point Franklin Gothic, another font of 18 point, and three or four fonts of 12-point, just to make sure there was always an ample supply of letters. (Like the rubber stamp kit you had as a kid, fonts contained only a fixed number of each letter, which were provided in proportion to their frequency.)
"
does any one else remember reading their local newspaper years ago, and then you"d sTart to see tH1s kind of s7uff? -
I like the fact that I can look at a menu or billboard and know what typeface is used. I feel special.
-
I love discussions like this!
The word "font" came to be used to mean "typeface" in the 1980s, by people who had no typographic training but who DID sell machines to compete with trade-typesetters.
"Typestyle" has always been understood by anyone I have ever used the word with... it's just that the people who sold "typesetting" programs wanted to make their products a bit more arcane by (mis)using a word that was not in common parlance.
Kind of like "cuts" was used for "zinc engravings" 80 years earlier. -
Just wanted to say 'hi' to all those VCU BFA alums out there! Got a kick out of seeing those old posts at the top of the thread.
-Class of '89 -
@ Cc: suggest using the generic term "type" with clients. everyone knows what it means. it's an inclusive term and saves confusion.
-
I agree with this article, far too many designers used the incorrect nomenclature. I do use this point as a judgment of a designer's knowledge; getting this question incorrect is sad, this is basic knowledge.
-
After reading this article more thoroughly, and viewing the comment by "SomeoneWhoKnows," I agree more with this individual's comment. Also, I have always been under the impression that fonts also included point size, in addition to all other individual variant design elements (font styles).
-
There's a group of us in the world called designers—we really are nerds.
-
I see a very similar problem with digital cameras. For legacy reasons, manufacturers feel a need to map mechanical or chemical terminology to the way a digital camera operates, and I think this can cause more confusion than it's worth. For example, digital cameras retain an ISO setting but in reality this is just a gain or volume control on the sensor. The fact that higher ISOs produce a grainier on both digital and wet film images is purely coincidence. With wet film it's a chemical problem but with digital cameras it's electrical noise, just like the hum or hiss you get when you raise an audio gain up to try and make the most of a very quiet signal. If digital cameras called the ISO setting 'Gain' and explained it in the manual as such, people (especially non-experts) would probably find it much easier to understand and use! The 'box based' font rendering models that computers often apply to draw text (or even print it out with modern printing techniques) is so radically different from old fashioned mechanical printing methods that it warrants its own terminology otherwise it'll only confuse people from different backgrounds. The lines are also very blurred. A single vector-based font file may be used by a program to produce text at different sizes or be emboldened and italicised (I know the proper way is to have a differnet font for bold and italic, especially if you want it to print right, but many programs can and do display 'normal' fonts in a range of styles), and it can also be used to produce small-caps, wide and condensed text too. Perhaps if Gutenburg had used the same metal that the Terminator was made from, thus giving his type pieces vector-like properties, then we would have ended up with terminology more suited to the ways fonts are used on computers, but it seems that trying to map all the old 'mechanical' terms to computers is a fools erand. In CSS, the styling language used to control the presentation of web pages, there are units of measurement called 'em' and 'ex'. These terms will seem obvious to people from a printing background, but while the CSS 'ex' means the same thing it's always meant, EMs actually refer to the height of a font, and for very good reasons. But I think this is another example where the need to retain old terminology but bend its meaning to make it fit computer models can be confusing if you have to work in different areas of graphic design.
-
I enjoyed the article, although truth be told it was the comments that clarified it for me. It's true that "typeface" would be the proper term for what most lay people call "fonts", but using jargon when it is confusing a client only puts them off and makes you, the designer, seem pretentious. It also fascinates me that many of the people who are so worried about other people's terrible grammar are either terrible typists or simply can't spell.
-
This misuse of the term "font" has bugged me, too, but it's a losing battle now, since even the software manuals use "font" and "typeface" interchangeably. Why does it matter? The more accurate we are with language, the less we risk miscommunication working with fellow artists, prepress pros and printers. I get just as frustrated with new designers who have learned to use the term "right justified" in place of the accurate term "right aligned." Right justified is type aligned both left AND right with the last line of the paragraph flushing right (very rarely done). Right aligned is the same as flush (or flushed) right: type that is aligned only on the right and ragged on the left. You can have a real mix-up on the job if you and your team don't use the correct terms consistently. The problem? Once again, even the software manuals now misuse these terms.
-
I typed into google -"professional typeface font" and this was the top hit. If I thought I knew the difference, I surely do now. The fact that this thread has been going since 2002 illustrates to me that this is a persistent issue, or at least some people are hehe. I, for instance, simply cannot believe how much lack of knowledge there is on things I take for granted - like punctuation, spelling, grammar - even hand-writing has taken a decline. Thanks for this.
© 2008 AIGA | 164 Fifth Avenue New York NY 10010 | 212 807 1990
Comments