New: Origin of Type Frameworks (OTF) Course

LeMo aka PatternMan aka Frank E Blokland

This course offers an online practical and theoretical study of type design and font technology, taught by Dr. Frank E. Blokland and Dr. Jürgen Willrodt. Together they have over 80 years of experience in the type industry.

During the online OTF Course, delivered via Zoom, letter aficionados will delve deeper into what type design and font production actually entails, by evaluating and questioning how to approach the subject theoretically and practically, also from less common points of view. This is done by exploring and analyzing the historical, aesthetic, and technical aspects of type design and typography. The aim is a deep understanding of what exactly this comprises and a quantifiable translation of this knowledge into practical applications.

An important role is reserved for Frank’s dissertation. In On the Origin of Patterning in Movable Latin Type: Renaissance Standardisation, Systematisation, and Unitisation of Textura and Roman Type he argues that Renaissance typographic patterns were partly determined by requirements for the early font production. Hence, today’s typographic conventions are not only the result of optical preferences predating movable type, but at least as much the result of standardization that eased the Renaissance font production.

In short, the OTF Course covers all the usual ingredients of type-design education, such as drawing, spacing, kerning, font formats, (automation of) font production, etc. However, on top of that, there is also a unique and advanced approach, based on almost 40 years of experience in vocational type-design education combined with academic research.

About the teachers: Jürgen (Hamburg, 1952) studied physics and mathematics and obtained a PhD in theoretical particle physics in 1976. As a software engineer, he became the lead developer of the IKARUS system since the early 1980s and developed interpolation, autotracing, and hinting algorithms, as well as special algorithms for Kanji separation. Frank (Leiden, 1959) is a type designer and has been (senior) lecturer in type design at the Royal Academy of Art (KABK) since 1987. From 1995 to 2025 he was senior lecturer and Research Fellow at the Plantin Institute of Typography in Antwerp. Frank founded the Dutch Type Library in 1990 and in October 2016 he successfully defended his PhD dissertation on Renaissance font-production standardization at Leiden University.

More information about the OTF Course can be found here.

LeMo aka PatternMan aka Frank E Blokland

We have now received the first requests for information and even registrations. I have also added a few lines to the description of the OTF course:

‘As for the font editors applied and discussed, students can use the application of their choice, be it Glyphs, RoboFont, FontLab, FontForge, FoundryMaster, or any other editor. The same goes for the operating system: it can be macOS, Windows, or a Linux distro. After all, while the controls for the font editors may differ, the resulting contour descriptions in cubic and quadratic Bézier curves are technically essentially the same, and so are the generated font formats. […]’

I could have listed FontCreator, Fontra, and Glyphr Studio as well. The more diverse the editors students prefer, the more they will learn from each other. After all, a person’s favorite font editor often plays a significant role in their overall workflow. Once a particular workflow is established, it tends to become the reference point for their evaluation of other font editors and associated workflows. However, this raises an interesting question: to what extent does the choice of tool influence the workflow and the mindset behind it?

The fact that a font editor is a favorite may be the result of factors such as conditioning, price, or general popularity. It is likely not always the outcome of personal preferences regarding functionality; rather, the preferences themselves may be adapted to what the tool offers. Of course, it is possible to personalize the tool to some extent if scripting is supported. However, this personalization still occurs within the technical boundaries of the tool.

I want to emphasize that comparing font editors is not about determining the ‘best’ tool, as such a conclusion would be subjective, if not impossible. Instead, the real question is how to effectively combine the functionalities of various font editors, where applicable.

LeMo aka PatternMan aka Frank E Blokland

Font technology plays a central role in the OTF Course. To truly appreciate and understand the technical advancements of today, it sometimes helps to place them within a historical context. Our archive contains several presentations from past decades, including this one delivered by Jürgen at the DTL FontMaster Conference in Hamburg in 2002.

In anticipation of the OTF Course, Jürgen and I will launch the first of a series of informal online gatherings next month, called Type [Tech] Chats (TTC). These two-hour sessions, basically held every four weeks at 16:00 CET, will cover a wide range of topics including font technology, type business, type-design education, and anything else that comes up.

The TTC sessions are open to everyone, and you are welcome to join at any time. No registration is required, but be sure to bring your own coffee! I will keep you informed.

Dave Crossland

I'm looking forward for more info on how to sign up for TTC sessions  

LeMo aka PatternMan aka Frank E Blokland

Hi Dave, you’ll be the first to know the date and time!

Regarding the topics we might discuss, such as font technology and business, I want to emphasize that the TTC will just be an exchange of thoughts. For example, in the case of the font business, I can’t offer much more advice than to stubbornly stick to your own path. I reckon DTL is too atypical to serve as a solid example for most.

That said, it would be interesting to exchange ideas on business models, and I’d be happy to share the thoughts I had over 35 years ago when I set up my company. It will also be interesting to discuss the future of our profession, especially as AI rapidly transforms the landscape. Of course, no one can predict the future: we can only try to extrapolate the present and make educated guesses.

As for font technology, Jürgen and I can help with any questions about OTM. We can also talk about the still-to-be-released GPOSMaster and FoundryMaster if anyone is interested. Other participants can share and demonstrate their own workflows and (the combination of) favorite font tools.

In short, the TTC is intended to be a relaxed ‘type café’ –so feel free to enjoy a coffee (or any beverage of your choice) while we chat.

LeMo aka PatternMan aka Frank E Blokland

This summer, I will be celebrating 38 years of teaching type design. Over the past decades, especially in Antwerp and The Hague, my students have been exploring type design with a strong focus on pattern formation, shifting away from the more traditional approach that typically prioritizes individual letterforms followed by iterative spacing adjustments. Instead, they begin by defining the overall rhythm and texture of the text, i.e., its pattern, and then refine individual elements, like serifs, to fit within that structure. To this foundation, they add a layer of idiomatic detail –a kind of varnish that gives the work its unique voice.

Pattern formation and the associated standardization are key components of the movable-type paradigm. As I argue in my dissertation, it all began with the intrinsic systematization found in the handwritten source models (think LeMo). These were used by the archetypal punchcutters to organize font production –essentially forming the basis for transferring letterforms to fixed-width rectangles. This structure not only streamlined the entire process from punchcutting to type casting and fynally typesetting, but also ensured consistency and reproducibility. In short, it was fundamental to both design quality and the industrial strength of the final product. Given this, it makes perfect sense to consider archetypal patterning not just for reviving historical models, but also for creating contemporary typefaces.

I tentatively consider the more traditional focus on letterforms a bit of a misconception about what type really is at its core: pattern formation. The reliance on ‘eyeballing’ stems, in my opinion, largely from this traditional approach. And because one starts with details and not with patterns, one has to fix things from the inside, instead of improving ‘aesthetic’ things from the outside. Moreover, it turns something that can be concrete, understandable, and reproducible into something unnecessarily mysterious. For example, as my students have discovered, spacing is parametrically reproducible, for example when using tools that focus on cadencing.

Of course, not everyone will agree with my approach and the text above, and that is to be expected. However, I believe it is essential that our field supports a diversity of perspectives and methodologies. It is encouraging to see that even master’s graduates of prominent type-design programs in Europe are drawn to my program. This is also already true of the new OTF Course. And even if, in the end, one prefers the more traditional approach with its emphasis on letterforms and eyeballing, engaging deeply with pattern-focused methods might well sharpen and strengthen that conviction, I reckon.