Posts Tagged ‘times new roman’

by Allan Haley

New Fonts – Lots Of New Fonts – And A Leap Into The Digital Age

Prior to 1995, ITC released about four new typeface families per year. From the summer of 1995 to the spring of 1996, nearly 40 new ITC families became available, along with a suite of Cyrillic extensions to existing designs, swashes and ornaments for the ITC Bodoni family, and a bevy of symbol fonts – all in the pages of U&lc, Volume 22. Articles on Web and video typography also peppered the pages of Volume 22, and the designers of a couple of issues had fun playing with the U&lc logo on the cover.

In addition to announcing six new display typeface designs, Volume 22, Number 1 contained two articles about books on CD (the beginning of e-publishing) and a roundup of early websites for children. It also featured the first ad for the Creative Alliance, an endeavor by the Type Division of Agfa (the precursor to Monotype Imaging) to build its own exclusive typeface library. Many of the typefaces in the Creative Alliance have since found their way into the ITC and Monotype typeface libraries. Oh, and on page 48, there is an ad for Graphic Solutions, a newsletter that I published for about three years – and that taught me how difficult the publishing business can be.

Volume 22, Number 2, continued to address the issues of publishing in a digital age and provided some guidance in designing with HTML – this was when the Times New Roman and Courier typefaces were considered the basic text designs. Chip Kidd also wrote about designing the cover of Nicholas Negroponte’s book, Being Digital, an analog solution for a hardcopy book on the future of digital technology, which is now online. Announcements for 21 new ITC typefaces (10 typeface families) filled many of the remaining pages of Volume 22, Number 2.

Volume 22, Number 3 was dedicated to “Graphics and the Cinema.” The issue also ushered in over 20 new ITC display typefaces, Cyrillic fonts for the ITC Franklin Gothic, ITC Korinna and ITC Flora typeface families, the ITC Humana super family, and a collection of swash and ornament characters for the ITC Bodoni family. ITC continued to look to the future of typography in several articles about type in film and video.

Volume 22, Number 4 focused on education and contained a wide range of articles, from advice for schools on preparing students to create meaningful digital content to a story about four educators in Japan who used experimental methods to teach students about sensitivity to the elements of design. New typeface releases included six new single-weight display typefaces, two new families and three ITC Goony ’Toons image fonts.

Click the PDFs below to find out what else was in U&lc Volume 22.

Low Resolution:

Volume 22–1 (Low Res).pdf (9.9 MB)

Volume 22–2 (Low Res).pdf (10.6 MB)

Volume 22–3 (Low Res).pdf (11.1 MB)

Volume 22–4 (Low Res).pdf (9.5 MB)

High Resolution:

Volume 22–1.pdf (48.3 MB)

Volume 22–2.pdf (58.5 MB)

Volume 22–3.pdf (58.8 MB)

Volume 22–4.pdf (50.8 MB)

Allan Haley
Allan Haley is Director of Words & Letters at Monotype Imaging. Here he is responsible for strategic planning and creative implementation of just about everything related to typeface designs.


by Allan Haley

Two graphic designers, Matthew Robinson and Tom Wrigglesworth, decided that they wanted to find out which typeface was the most “earth friendly.” Their collaboration, called “Measuring Type,” took several popular typefaces and determined how much printer ink each consumed.

I’m suspect.

The study involved the Brush Script™, Comic Sans®, Cooper Black, Courier, Garamond, Helvetica®, Impact and Times New Roman® typefaces. The comparison was supposedly done by drawing out large-scale renditions of the typefaces using ballpoint pens, “allowing the remaining ink levels to display the ink efficiency of each typeface.”

Cute concept, but not exactly scientific. First, drawing a rendition of a typeface is not an accurate way to determine how much ink the actual typeface consumes. Second, if you’ve used a ballpoint pen, you know that you can do an awful lot of writing (certainly more than a half-dozen big letters) before any appreciable loss of ink is noticeable.

Then, there are the results. According to the study, Garamond used the least amount of ink, followed by Courier, Brush Script, Times New Roman and then Helvetica. Comic Sans, Cooper Black and Impact were deemed the ink-gluttons of the pack.

While I’m sure that Robinson and Wrigglesworth had the best of intentions with their study, it also ignores one of the main tenets of typographic communication: legibility. As I wrote in an earlier post, legibility is measure of how easy it is to distinguish one letter from another – a pretty important aspect when it comes to reading.

Garamond is generally considered to be a very legible typeface. Courier, because of its mono-width letters, however, is not. It is also less legible than the fourth place Times New Roman and the fifth place Helvetica. Because it is a script, the same holds true for the third place Brush Script.

If you want to save ink, the results of the Measuring Type study may be helpful. If, however, your goal is to make it easy for your readers to assimilate your content the study is a few points short of an em-quad.

Allan Haley
Allan Haley is Director of Words & Letters at Monotype Imaging. Here he is responsible for strategic planning and creative implementation of just about everything related to typeface designs.