Finally decided to properly organize my fonts by category, and I'm having a bit of a hard time.
Cristóbal Alarcón
Posts: 78
I've been looking into different sources, mostly relying on Smashing Magazine, a Quora post and other articles, but I'm not into this too professionally. And there are a few things that I can't really tell the difference.
So far, I've categorized my fonts folders like this:
Serif
- Humanist / Venetian
- Oldstyle
- Transitional
- Didone / Modern
- Lapidary / Wedge
Sans serif
- Grotesk
- Neogrotesk
- Geometric
- Humanist
- Flared / Glyphic
Slab serif
Monospaced
Blackletter
Calligraphic
- Brush
-- No texture
-- With Texture
- Manuscript
-- Casual
-- Formal
Display
- WHATEVER ADJECTIVE THERE IS
Super families
I'm having a hard time figuring what the differences are between Humanist Sans Serif vs Flared/Glyphic, and Humanist/Venetian Serif vs Oldstyle Serif. Besides that, is this classification accurate?
0
Comments
-
Thats the traditional way to categorize typefaces.. It doesn't work2
-
PabloImpallari said:Thats the traditional way to categorize typefaces.. It doesn't work0
-
The grouping alongside the main historic styles is common practice and has some merits, but is also very limited. It can happen that Venetian and Textured apply to one typeface the same time. Or Blackletter and Calligraphic, and so on. A smart sorting scheme would, i.m.h.o., need to be at least two-dimensional.
1 -
Yes, of course there are many betters ways, and they are all fabulous!
But thats depends of your persona, for example:
This was Me, 20 years ago. I was totallly new to fonts:
(3 categories was ok for me at that tine)
- The ones I like
- The ones I don't like, but still need to use for work
- The ones that sucks
This is also me, 15 years ago. I discovered dafont:
(About 20 categories now)
- Calligraphy
- Cartoon
- Eroded
- Terror
- Dingbats
- etc...
- Fuck! Only uppercase, no lowercase!
- Fuck! No diacritics!
etc...
- Free
- Not free
etc...
Me 10 years ago, when entering the font world:
(All the previous ones, plus 28 more new categories)
- Sans
- Serif
- Slab
- Blackletter
- Formal Script
etc..
- Light
- Medium
- Bold
- Heavy
etc...
- Condensed
- Normal
- Expanded
etc..
- Single Style
- Part of a family
- Foundry
- Designer
- Date
- Original Medium (Metal, Wood, Digital)
Also me, when getting into Calligraphy and Handlettering
(added 36 new classifications)
- Chancery
- Lombardic
- Cadels
- Expressive
etc..
- Fast Writing
- Slow Writing
- Wrist Movement
- Full arm movement starting from the elbow
- Constant pressure
- Variable pressure
etc...
- Pointed Nib
- Flat Nib
- Speedball rounded Nib
- Steel Brush
- Rulling Pen
- Red Sable Pointed Brush
- Flat Brush
- Dry Brsh
- Wet Brush
etc..
Another me again, after learning for quite some years:
(38 more categories)
- Mono-width
- Duplexed widths
- Incised
- Chiselled
- Swash
etc..
- High contrast
- Low Contrast
- Reversed Contrast
- Monoline
- Vertical Stress
- diagonal Stress
etc..
- Lining Numbers
- Old Srtyle Numbers
- Proportional Numbers
- Smallcaps
etc..
- Poster
- Display (Note that Display here has a new and different meaning than before)
- Text
- Agate
etc..
Me now, a complete nerd:
(at this time I have than 200 categories in total.. I don't even call them categories any more.. now I call them "data-points")
- Small x-height
- Large x-height
- Inktraps
- No Overshoots / Exagerated Overshoots
- Good Hinting / Bad Hinting
- etc, etc, etc...
- Humanisting Uppercase Proportions
- Modern Uppercase Proportions
- Rounded /A constrction (similar to the /O)
- Rounded /A apex (Similar to an upsidown /U)
- /J sit on the baseline
- /J goues down the baseline
- etc, etc, etc...
- Rounded /o
- Squared /o
- open /c
- closed /c
- one story /g
- two story /g
- looped /l
- rounded /y (similar to the /u)
- etc, etc, etc...
- Slashed Zero
- Dotted Zero
- Flat /3 top
- Crossed /7
- Fake Blackletter Numbers / True Blackletter Numbers
- etc, etc, etc...
- Faithfull revival
- Interpretative Revival
- Uses a unitized weight system
- Creative cool new design truly different to everything else?
- Good concept but Poor execution
- etc, etc, etc...
Me in the future? Who Knows!
Currently I'm training some Artificial Intelligence Magic shit to do the classification for me, so I don't have to do it any more.
I have even created a entirely new unit measurement scale (not yet public) that assigns each font a unique numeric value that represents the complete relations between all the proportions in each font (including weight, width, x-height, ascenders and descenders, side-bearings)
As you can see... You can go from very general categories like "sans" and "serifs", to very specific ones like "inktraps" and "slashed Zero".
The thing is.. find what works for YOU at your current level of interest.
You will evolve over time and you will keep improving your categories.
If you are now wanting to organize your fonts.. means you got the sickness already
Have fun!
Don't worry too much if the categories are not perfect, they will never be.
Also, at some point in your journey, you will find that having your fonts files in separated folders wont cut it anymore.. and you will hate font managers apps... The only solution is to create your very own custom database system.
5 -
Cristóbal Alarcón said:I'm having a hard time figuring what the differences are between Humanist Sans Serif vs Flared/Glyphic, and Humanist/Venetian Serif vs Oldstyle Serif. Besides that, is this classification accurate?0
-
I did a sorting project for my use and simply went with the name of the most famous representative font from each style. If it's an open sans, it's a Meta. If it's a square sans, it's a Eurostile. That way, I could easily divide overpopulated categories or merge underpopulated ones. Akzidenz and Arial aren't Helvetica, but I can classify them as Helveticas instead of neo-grotesques. Gotham? That's a Franklin.
3 -
I sort mine descending by license cost.
1 -
Hm I'm not a type designer, but these classifications have made 100% sense to me when searching for typefaces for my clients' projects. Now I've decided to organize myself because of the adjectives, characteristics, and uses that come with those categories, and use the ones that align with the project's needs.And for data points like those @PabloImpallari references, I just use FontBase, which, although very limited compared to Pablo's classification, allows me to search fonts by weight, width, contrast, and x-height.PabloImpallari said:and you will hate font managers apps...PabloImpallari said:
The thing is.. find what works for YOU at your current level of interest.
You will evolve over time and you will keep improving your categories.
If you are now wanting to organize your fonts.. means you got the sickness already
Have fun!0 -
Cristóbal Alarcón said:Finally decided to properly organize my fonts by category, and I'm having a bit of a hard time.That sounds like a frustrating exercise in futility to me.
Categorizing seems inherent to human nature, and I suppose it works quite well when there are hard lines between the categories. It doesn't work nearly as well when one tries to divide up a chaotic mix of things, like type styles, into neatly organized piles.1 -
I just put them in alphabetical folders, i.e., "A", "B", "C", etc. Fonts such as "ITC Garamond" go in "G", not "I".0
-
Maybe these programs will help someone:
https://github.com/GerHobbelt/FontOrg-and-FontRenamer
You must enable net framework 2.0 and 3.5 in windows features to fontrenamer works.
Sami0 -
My current ones are cataloged as so:
- Serif
- Sans
- Slab
- Script/Handwriting
- Display
- Blackletter/Uncial
- Dingbat
- Japanese
- Demo (mainly a testing folder)
0 -
According to ‘a certain Chinese Encyclopedia’, The Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge, typefaces are divided into the following categories:
- those used to typeset the words of the Emperor,
- no longer available ones,
- those that are good for ‘the small print’,
- the ones you used last week,
- those that remind you of former lovers,
- fabulous ones,
- those in unknown formats,
- those included in the present classification,
- those you have forgotten,
- innumerable ones,
- those that are too light to be used for the present job,
- others,
- those in which the g ‘just looks wrong’,
- those that will be used to typeset this list.
7 -
Thanks John for bringing that beautiful poem back to life!
I was desperately looking for it but since Typophile is dead I thought It was lost
0 -
Elena wrote a nice blog article about classification, which included my Borges parody, along with Miguel Catopodis’ translation into Spanish:
Se atribuye «a cierta enciclopedia china que se titula Emporio Celestial de conocimientos…» que las tipografías se dividen en las siguientes categorías:
- aquellas usadas para componer las palabras del Emperador
- las que ya no estan disponibles
- aquellas que son buenas para “la letra chica”
- las que has usado la semana pasada
- aquellas que te recuerdan a tus ex amantes
- las fabulosas
- las de formato desconocido
- aquellas incluidas en la presente clasificación
- aquellas que has olvidado
- innumerables
- aquellas que son demasiado livianas para usar en este trabajo
- etcétera
- aquellas en las que la “g” simplemente se ve mal
- aquellas que serán usadas para componer esta lista
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 43 Introductions
- 3.7K Typeface Design
- 803 Font Technology
- 1K Technique and Theory
- 622 Type Business
- 444 Type Design Critiques
- 542 Type Design Software
- 30 Punchcutting
- 136 Lettering and Calligraphy
- 83 Technique and Theory
- 53 Lettering Critiques
- 485 Typography
- 303 History of Typography
- 114 Education
- 68 Resources
- 499 Announcements
- 80 Events
- 105 Job Postings
- 148 Type Releases
- 165 Miscellaneous News
- 270 About TypeDrawers
- 53 TypeDrawers Announcements
- 116 Suggestions and Bug Reports