Paramond — an extreme display serif

Martin Silvertant

Martin: Thanks for the insights! I made a /g_g, /g_y, and /g_g_y ligature, along with some accented versions — does that work?

It looks very good!

Also, as usual, I have trouble judging whether my /Schwa/schwa work. I like the way they look, though:

Do you always add support for phonetics?

In any case, I would change or remove the terminal on the lowercase schwa. Like Steve, I know nothing about the schwa so take my advice with a pinch of salt, but from what I can see the lowercase seems to get a terminal like Steve suggested.




I honestly don't think you should worry much about the schwa looking like an /a. It's not like the schwa has a prominent use, and within the context it's for (phonetics), certainly one would recognize the schwa.

Christian Thalmann

Martin: I don't generally support IPA, since it comes with an incredibly large store of glyphs and combining diacritics. While I'm a great fan of IPA as such, I feel these things are best left to the specialists.

The Schwa, on the other hand, is used as part of regular Latin and Cyrillic orthographies, such as Azerbaijani. I talked to a linguist friend a while ago in the context of Traction (http://typedrawers.com/discussion/comment/9166/#Comment_9166), and he recommended having a serif to represent the onstroke in handwriting.

I think I'm going with my own æsthetic judgement on this and sticking with the /z-style serif for now.

Christian Thalmann

I have an urge to draw a serif-like spike on the tops of ligatures like /fl. Is that historically sound? It reminds me of the forked tops of some blackletter ascenders.

More importantly, do you consider it in character? Intuitively, it makes sense to me as a remainder of the right-sided peak of the default ascender top after the connection with /f usurps the main weight.

Christian Thalmann

I tried old-style numbers that rise to 3/4 the cap height. They strike me as a bit coarse. Maybe I should rather reduce them to x-height?

Jan Schmoeger

Do both? They are like the tall ascenders and descenders, a bit over the top, but that's your goal? The /five is a bit weird? Shorter arm? The spur?

Christian Thalmann

Hi Jan,

I'm not sure what you mean by "do both". Are you suggesting I keep both x-high and 3/4-cap figures in the font? I intend to do that by declaring the 3/4-cap ones the smallcaps figures.

Meanwhile, here are the x-high figures. Better? I'm intrigued by that /I-shaped /1, but I think I'll keep the more legible version as the default.

I also looked at various Garamond /5's and /7's and found they had opposite stress placement from what I'd been using, so I changed them.

Martin Silvertant

/7 could perhaps be a bit thicker in the middle, so there is a more gradual transition in the bottom bold part. The reverse contrast works well though.

I have an urge to draw a serif-like spike on the tops of ligatures like /fl. Is that historically sound?

I'm not sure. Does it need to be though?

Jan Schmoeger

I intend to do that by declaring the 3/4-cap ones the smallcaps figures.

Exactly, that would be nice. The /five and /seven are much better. I like this typeface a lot, fwiw.

Christian Thalmann

I'm probably the only one who will ever care, but I removed the x-height spur from /ſ and love it all the more now.

Martin Silvertant

I have to say I think it looks odd.

Christian Thalmann

We'll have to disagree on that. ;o) Actually, I've always found that spur counterintuitive, sitting there in the middle of a stroke (particularly in a sans, oof...). There's also plenty of examples of spurless /ſ in serif faces, like Times New Roman.

Martin Silvertant

Perhaps it's a matter of what you're used to, because I've never seen a spurless /ſ and I feel there should be a horizontal to support the ascending curve. No other ascenders are behaving in such a matter, so there should be something that indicates a center point. I have to say though, the more I look at it, the less awkward it seems. I guess it really is just a matter of getting used to.

Christian Thalmann

Perhaps it's a matter of what you're used to, because I've never seen a spurless /ſ

It certainly seems to have been an integral part of the glyph in historical upright scripts, such as Carolingian. There, it used to be written as a straight downstroke as if starting an /n, then a second stroke down from the apex (making an unsightly ink blot where it overlapped with the first stroke), and the curl as a third stroke.

In my own calligraphic endeavors, I always write it in two strokes, the first starting from the apex and going all the way down. I find it yields a much more organic shape than the "clumpy shoulder" method.

In any case, we present-day designers shouldn't feel obliged to stick to calligraphic tradition beyond what is useful and attractive. Quite a few modern-age serif fonts have spurless /ſ, such as TNR and Georgia.

I feel there should be a horizontal to support the ascending curve.

I find /l does just fine without a horizontal... if anything, it's the spurred /ſ that falls out of line with the rest of the alphabet. I can't think of another instance of a one-sided serif in the middle of a stroke.

No other ascenders are behaving in such a matter, so there should be something that indicates a center point.

The Sulzbacher /ß comes to mind, which is nowadays the most accepted form. In fact, I suspect the /ſ would have made the same evolution if it hadn't fallen out of fashion.

Jan Schmoeger

Out of faſhion it deſerves to be, meþinks.

Christian Thalmann

Smallcaps! And yes, that's a small-cap /ſ, becauſe reaſons.

Steve Gardner

Methinkſ they look ſplendid!

Deleted Account

I think this is great progress on a worthy design.

I'd be interested to see f and friends starting from an historically accurate, non-kerning, metal f. Then imagining and enacting the cleaving off and stretching of parts for the related glyphs and ligatures... not that the f you've started with is not gorgeous. You just might land differently on some glyphs "authenticity";)

I'd also love to see the progression of the g that seemed to be Moonwalking in "Ouagadougou", when first we met. Now it's still different, but a different different.

I was not happy when you raised the x height. I like the first proportions.

I would explore different designs for the small caps, like a slightly less, but still high waisted A, less contrasting B bowls, a wider L, straight M stems on its sides.

I'd like to see at least the middle cross strokes of small cap E and F and perhaps all cross strokes of EFLT and Z follow that of f and t, all those serifs being now perhaps too precious and busy for small caps?

I'd like the upper case U to be more like a "Roman" U for all cap use, with the current uncle uncial U for mixed case initial use, and as the model for small cap, as you've drawn.

Back to something boring.

Martin Silvertant

In my own calligraphic endeavors, I always write it in two strokes, the first starting from the apex and going all the way down. I find it yields a much more organic shape than the "clumpy shoulder" method.

What method is this? I thought the /ſ is actually done in three strokes if you're including the spur.

In any case, we present-day designers shouldn't feel obliged to stick to calligraphic tradition beyond what is useful and attractive. Quite a few modern-age serif fonts have spurless /ſ, such as TNR and Georgia.

I don't. My reasons for wanting to see the spur included weren't really based on historical convention. It's true I said it looked odd because I haven't seen it before, but I feel there are good reasons for why the spur is included at all. Or rather, I feel there are good reasons to keep it. As I said I feel there should be a horizontal to support the ascending curve. Yes, /l works perfectly without a spur because it has no curve. There are no letters that seem to curve beyond the x-height or baseline that doesn't have a horizontal. In fact, the only deviating ascenders (f/t) have horizontals to divide the shape. One might call them semi-ascenders to distinguish them from b/d/h/l. I consider it to be logical that if the ascender does curve, there is a horizontal to indicate the x-height (practically below it). Without the spur, you lose some of the texture you will find throughout a serif typeface.

But as I said, it has grown on me. It looks a bit alien to me, like it's morphing into a different script. This is just a loose association but I'm reminded of Cyrillic. It's for this reason that the spurless /ſ is growing on me. If it's about practicality, I would include the spur. If it's about aesthetics, I'm not sure. Historical convention I feel isn't as relevant in this case. I know you're looking at Garamonds and want to maintain a certain authenticity, but considering this is an exaggerated display Garamond I wouldn't necessarily feel the need to remain authentic. Two variants would be a lot of fun though.

Very nice to see small-caps! You work fast. I agree with David's points. Some of the small-caps could be wider, especially the /L.

Christian Thalmann

Hi David,

thanks for your insights!

I'd be interested to see f and friends starting from an historically accurate, non-kerning, metal f. Then imagining and enacting the cleaving off and stretching of parts for the related glyphs and ligatures... not that the f you've started with is not gorgeous. You just might land differently on some glyphs "authenticity";)

Huh, I thought my /f was pretty standard Garamond, apart from being waifishly slim. By non-kerning, are you referring to the style of /f with an extremely short flag? I actually consider the decadently long flag of Garamond's /f as one of its most iconic features.

I have to run now; I'll address some of your other comments later. Meanwhile, here's a sneak peek at the new unicase alternates that I just added to the smallcaps:

Martin Silvertant

I'm not entirely sure about the tittles, but the unicase variant is a lot of fun.

Craig Eliason

You might try unicase variants of /m/n/ that retain the lowercase form but have a vertical lead-in serif. Similarly, for unicase /a/, you could try a serif that stays on the baseline (like /u/) rather than an outstroke.

Christian Thalmann

Martin: Made the dotted form into its own stylistic option.

Craig: I was just thinking the same thing. I'll give it a try tonight. I'm not sure it'll work on the /a though.

Christian Thalmann

Works really well for /n/m. I tried it for /a, too, but it was oogly. That tail is just part of the glyph.

How about that /y? Am I starting to tread too far into Disturbance/Parity territory?


David, as for your other comments:

I'd also love to see the progression of the g that seemed to be Moonwalking in "Ouagadougou", when first we met. Now it's still different, but a different different.

It just seems too impractical for its own good right now. I might revisit it and mature it into a valid stylistic alternate at some point.

I changed some of the smallcaps as per your suggestions, but kept /b/m/t/z as they were — I like them that way.

I do have a regular footless /U design as a stylistic alternate, but I prefer the Perpetua-style /U for regular use.

Christian Thalmann

Martin:

What method is this? I thought the /ſ is actually done in three strokes if you're including the spur.

Exactly; I'm doing two strokes without the spur.

You work fast.

I use Glyphs.

Christian Thalmann

After resisting for a long time, I finally tried out a closed form for /ampersand, although I think of them as cramped and stuffy. Turns out I really like the way it came out.

Martin Silvertant

Really beautiful ampersand indeed. I would probably make the weight shift a bit more gradual at the top (a bit on the right side) though.

Christian Thalmann

My first cut of this face is getting complete enough to start thinking about the bigger picture. What do you figure this face needs more — heavier weights, or an italic?

Jan Schmoeger

Italic could be beautiful …

Christian Thalmann

I was afraid you'd say that.   An Italic is a lot more work than a Bold.

Does a display font really need an Italic, though...? Come to think of it, many book covers do employ Italics as well as Romans, so I can certainly see the usefulness.

I suppose I could still aim for a first release with just the Roman weight spectrum and add the Italics later. I see that happening for display fonts on MyFonts every once in a while.

Martin Silvertant

I'm having this dilemma myself with a couple of typefaces. For me, I think perhaps the smarter choice is to make the typefaces more complete before I release them. I have the feeling that I will be missing potential sales by releasing part of the typeface now and an update later.