Awesome work on the Census! It's really interesting to see the timeline and how each event fuels the next ones.
Two small corrections: 1) Foundry Index: Latinotype only 3 people? AFAIK they are the biggest in Sud-America, aprox 16 people. 2) Timeline: IIRC Google Fonts predates Fontsping & Webtype
1. They may have had 3 founders in 2013, which this census represents. And though there are fonts from other designers in their library, the staff may still be only 3. I'll ask them. 2. Fixed.
I think Ruxandra explains it pretty well in the piece, Simon. The initial version of the paper was called Independent Type Foundries Today, as that was her focus: companies essentially run by people who make type, rather than those which might have ownership with other interests. There has been plenty written about Montoype. This is about the indies.
Seems like all foundries are small if you don't count the big ones!
That’s true! That’s part of what makes this industry so interesting.
What was the motivation for excluding Monotype and friends?
I’m surprised that URW(++) isn’t mentioned either. I would say that this Hamburg, Germany based company is the oldest digital type foundry. After all, digital typography started with Dr. Karow’s IKARUS system.
Yes, I think that's an oversight and we’ll discuss adding URW++ to the existing census. Although the company was just sold, they could certainly be considered independent at the time of the writing. Initially, Ruxandra chose her list of foundries from those that were active on Twitter or were included in Jan Middendorp’s Type Navigator (see Lists), but we had since simplified the criteria to any independent, large or small.
Seems like all foundries are small if you don't count the big ones!
That’s true! That’s part of what makes this industry so interesting.
What actually is happening here, is basically arbitrary coloring and filtering, which could have a big impact on the perception of (type) history by third parties. This is happening everywhere, and I also noticed it during my PhD research.
If I read: ‘Meanwhile, software and computer hardware companies like Adobe and Apple were on the rise, accompanied in their ascent by small foundries such as Emigre, the Enschedé Font Foundry, and FontShop/FontFont, which worked from the desktop.’ then I’m surprised because for instanceFontBureau was founded in 1989, and the Dutch Type Library dates from 1990.
If URW++ is not mentioned from the first moment on, then this is also not based on a correct handling of (historic) data. If you make an overview like this and you want to it to be as objectively informative as possible, then there should be no room for such sorting IMHO.
I think it's fair to present this as a survey of small, independent, Western foundries. That's a bit different to a census of the type industry, but it has value within those parameters.
Frank, it’s not exactly arbitrary. Ruxandra’s research is based on sources which are cited in the footnotes and timeline bibliography. Inevitably, there will be omissions, some due to time and space and reader considerations, some unintentional. The beauty of this format is that we can make changes. This is only a starting point. Feedback like yours will make the site better. So, thank you!
Regarding general history, Fontshop was huge in nurturing indie designers like me prior to the internet era, and once the web took off, Typophile and Typecon were huge in enabling me to learn and network.
Also, Makambo was the first online distributor for indie foundries, getting the ball rolling prior to the dotcom crash.
Sorry, Thierry, but I can’t quite get what you mean. I keep reading it and chuckling about charting the actual size (height and weight) of each type designer. Can you rephrase?
Haha wow, I should have taken a moment to re-read my post and make it actually understandable. Sorry for that.
I’d love to see how many people actually work in which situation, as @Rob Mientjes describes it. Only one company might have 26+ people, but obviously it takes 26+ 1 person companies to reach the same amount of people in total. It would be interesting to know how many actual people work in which kind of company size.
Got it. This version takes a very foundry-centric approach, but it’s certainly worth looking at it from the individual’s perspective. Noted for the next edition.
Inevitably, there will be omissions, some due to time and space and reader considerations, some unintentional.
February 2014 I discussed my idea of a digital font-technology timeline blog with a couple of colleagues, among whom Chuck Bigelow. This was my initial e-mail:
Because there are recollections of technical developments in the past (roughly) 40 years from different view points and experiences –due to for instance direct involvement in font format developments– I think that it would be nice to make a blog where this info is stored. Not like in Wikipedia, where one can alter each others texts, but parallel in columns with a timeline. The idea is that the authors don’t react or respond on their colleague’s texts, but just put their recollections parallel to the other related ones from the same period. The authors will be invited by the editors (volunteers?); it should *not* become a blog for posting opinions, but for writing history in the most objective form.
Isn’t it a pity that we don't have this from Gutenberg, Jenson, Da Spira (brothers), Griffo, et cetera!
In the meantime Chuck started with posting some of his texts on his own blog.
Where does the 'two type designers in the same room' originate? Could this same sentiment be said about all creative fields, or is there something particular about type design?
I was just discussing recently how there may be more 'rules' in design, let alone type design, compared to other creative fields. It seems that the nature of subjectivity and personal style is as predominant as any other though, but maybe it's more pronounced in this field because of its archetypal limitations.
Comments
It's really interesting to see the timeline and how each event fuels the next ones.
Two small corrections:
1) Foundry Index: Latinotype only 3 people? AFAIK they are the biggest in Sud-America, aprox 16 people.
2) Timeline: IIRC Google Fonts predates Fontsping & Webtype
1. They may have had 3 founders in 2013, which this census represents. And though there are fonts from other designers in their library, the staff may still be only 3. I'll ask them.
2. Fixed.
That’s true! That’s part of what makes this industry so interesting.
If I read: ‘Meanwhile, software and computer hardware companies like Adobe and Apple were on the rise, accompanied in their ascent by small foundries such as Emigre, the Enschedé Font Foundry, and FontShop/FontFont, which worked from the desktop.’ then I’m surprised because for instance FontBureau was founded in 1989, and the Dutch Type Library dates from 1990.
If URW++ is not mentioned from the first moment on, then this is also not based on a correct handling of (historic) data. If you make an overview like this and you want to it to be as objectively informative as possible, then there should be no room for such sorting IMHO.
F.
Also, Makambo was the first online distributor for indie foundries, getting the ball rolling prior to the dotcom crash.
Although it was told at my expense, I always liked Bill Hill's joke:
Q: What do you call two type designers together in a room?
A: An argument.
I’d love to see how many people actually work in which situation, as @Rob Mientjes describes it. Only one company might have 26+ people, but obviously it takes 26+ 1 person companies to reach the same amount of people in total. It would be interesting to know how many actual people work in which kind of company size.
Because there are recollections of technical developments in the past (roughly) 40 years from different view points and experiences –due to for instance direct involvement in font format developments– I think that it would be nice to make a blog where this info is stored. Not like in Wikipedia, where one can alter each others texts, but parallel in columns with a timeline. The idea is that the authors don’t react or respond on their colleague’s texts, but just put their recollections parallel to the other related ones from the same period. The authors will be invited by the editors (volunteers?); it should *not* become a blog for posting opinions, but for writing history in the most objective form.
Isn’t it a pity that we don't have this from Gutenberg, Jenson, Da Spira (brothers), Griffo, et cetera!
In the meantime Chuck started with posting some of his texts on his own blog.
I was just discussing recently how there may be more 'rules' in design, let alone type design, compared to other creative fields. It seems that the nature of subjectivity and personal style is as predominant as any other though, but maybe it's more pronounced in this field because of its archetypal limitations.