Acknowledgement in books

lorcand

Occasionally a publisher will acknowledge the fonts used in a publication. However, more typically not. This is despite the contribution of the font to overall reception. This is so, even in cook books or art books, for example, where the font may be quite distinctive and a foregrounded design element. Are there good reason for this?

Joshua Langman

This is called a colophon, and it has been included in books going back almost to the beginning of printing (when it was somewhat different and functioned more like a copyright page). These days, publishers are likely to include colophons only if they have invested significant resources into the design and production of a book and want to call attention to these aspects of the book specifically.

A modern-day colophon typically includes information about the typefaces and their designers, the printing method used for the book, the paper and binding materials and processes, the illustrations (if any), and credits for the book designer, typesetter, art director, production manager, print shop, etc. The colophon, by tradition, is the last printed page of the book.

An alternative to a full colophon page is to credit the typeface and book designer on the copyright page (title verso).

Inclusion of a colophon may vary book by book, with only the most lavishly produced books from a publisher receiving them. On the other hand, some trade publishers, notably Knopf, have a tradition of including them in all or most books. On the other hand, I was surprised to find that the Folio Society, a publisher of fine editions, apparently never includes colophons.

When my first book was published two years ago by an academic publisher, the publisher suggested that we include a colophon. This is atypical for them, but they wanted to acknowledge my design work. Having already written it, I was happy to oblige.

Joshua Langman

Many colophons credit only the text face, not the display face, either to keep things simple or to limit the number of pre-written typeface credits a publisher needs to keep on hand. Then there are folks who take the opposite approach.

This remains my favorite colophon that I've written.

Paul Hanslow

All books should include a colophon listing the typefaces.
I. will. die. on. this. hill.

John Butler

Many books are bound in signatures, and the amount of extra blank pages left can sometimes determine whether they add or remove a colophon. It's a dumb reason.

I'm sure there's a book out there somewhere with no colophon and yet with a “This page intentionally blank.”

Florian Hardwig

A big motivation for starting Fonts In Use was to credit typefaces (and their designers) used in books and other published works.
We have a meta-level tag “colophons/imprints” for Uses that have images of such included credits. We recently introduced a more specific tag, “a note on the type”. It’s applied to cases where the note goes beyond a mere mention of the typeface’s name and designer/foundry, and also offers a brief bio of the typeface or similar.

Yves Michel

Paul Hanslow said:

All books should include a colophon listing the typefaces...

I think this is true not only for books but also for websites or other types of publications.

lorcand

Thank you for comments. I assume putting something in the license requesting credit is something that is undesirable? Has been tried and doesn't work? Is seen as pointless?

Thomas Phinney

It isn’t a BAD thing, but the folks actually doing the decision-making are probably a couple steps removed from whoever (if anyone) is reading the license.    

John Hudson

License terms need to be enforceable, which is why they are best defined in terms of usages and quantities with clearly related costs at time of purchase. What steps would you take if someone used the font and failed to credit it? Also, would you expect the credit to occur everywhere that a font is used? — on a business card?

JoyceKetterer

@John Hudson I think the next iteration of our license says something like "we ask that you please credit the font you are using wherever you include credits, including design award applications".  So, it's not a requirement, but it's there.  

lorcand

I was thinking mostly of books, given that other design elements are often credited. 

Ramiro Espinoza

When it comes to a publishing house crediting fonts and their designers nobody does it better than www.toc.berlin. And they are designing what are possibly the most beautiful books today.

Stephen Coles

Florian Hardwig said:

We recently introduced a more specific tag, “a note on the type”. It’s applied to cases where the note goes beyond a mere mention of the typeface’s name and designer/foundry, and also offers a brief bio of the typeface or similar.

In my limited research so far, this tradition (and its phrasing) may have started around 1920 with the publisher Alfred A. Knopf, who included it in many books thereafter. It was often an opportunity for the typesetter to show off with elaborate layouts, and the typeface bios could be surprisingly in-depth, sometimes nearly filling a full page.

W.A. Dwiggins was a frequent adopter of the “note on the type”, adding it to many of the books he designed. See his notes on Janson, Scotch, and his own Stuyvesant (unreleased).

I haven’t found evidence that other publishers picked up the convention (at least with this phrase) until the 1990s.

Mark Simonson

This just reminded me of a parody written by Bruce McCall that appeared in a 1997 issue of The New Yorker called "A Note on the Type." A friend of mine sent me a photocopy of it around the time it was published. You can see part of the article on The New Yorker's website, but a paywall blocks the rest. If I find the photocopy I could post it here.

The timing of this piece fits with @Stephen Coles idea that the practice didn't become widespread until the 1990s.

John Butler

Did it perhaps coincide with the early 20th century private press movement? And is your research confined to Anglophone books?

John Hudson

There is also a short story by Ron Carlson entitled ‘A note on the type’, published in Harper’s in October 1993. I have only found the opening online:

No alphabet comes along full-grown. A period of development is required for the individual letters to bloom and then another period for them to adjust to their place in the entire set, and sometimes this period can be a few weeks or it can be a lifetime. No quality font maker ever sat down and wrote out A to Z just like that.

It doesn’t happen. Getting Ray Bold right required five months, an intense creative period for me that has included my ten-week escape from the state facilities at Windchime, Nevada, and my return here one week ago.

And there is an amusing if belaboured parody by Jonathan Safran Foer, from The Guardian in December 2002, entitled ‘About the typefaces not used in this edition’.

JLA

In my experience, it’s up to the book designer.

E. g., in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, an Impressum is required in every print publication—basically a blend of copyright page and colophon. It can appear anywhere in the publication but is most commonly set on page 4 (verso of the title page) or in the back of the book; or it can be split. In addition to the legally required information, you are free to add to it any kind of credit you like. I always include typeface(s), foundry(ies), and type designer(s) by default and only remove them if requested by the client. This rarely happens, though.

(For some reason, it seems to be much more common to credit paper stock and manufacturers than typefaces and type designers—probably reveals what book designers value more.)

In publications for countries without legal requirement for a credit-like page, it’s a bit tricky sometimes to include typeface acknowledgements. Still, I just try to put them somewhere by default and if I don’t make a fuss of it, the thing will often get nodded through.

James Goggin

Mark Simonson said:

This just reminded me of a parody written by Bruce McCall that appeared in a 1997 issue of The New Yorker called "A Note on the Type." A friend of mine sent me a photocopy of it around the time it was published. You can see part of the article on The New Yorker's website, but a paywall blocks the rest. If I find the photocopy I could post it here.

The timing of this piece fits with @Stephen Coles idea that the practice didn't become widespread until the 1990s.

“Backslap” remains an excellent name for a typeface. (Still unused, as far as I can see!)

Dan Reynolds

JLA said:

(For some reason, it seems to be much more common to credit paper stock and manufacturers than typefaces and type designers—probably reveals what book designers value more.)

True! And also likely because the paper purchase is often more expensive than a typeface license, at least for the desktop licenses used in print design.