Hi, sorry. I'm in this publication design course and happen to know that in 2007 a documentary film about the ubiquitous typeface, Helvetica is being released, made by Gary Hustwit, the same guy who made the documentary on Wilco. I really don't know why I'm so excited about this. Because I'm really f'king excited. The typeface turns 50 next year! Oh, and the film/font also has a myspace.
There also seems to be a deep, historical reason as to why I have always been so averse to Arial.
In other news, our front door was re-keyed this afternoon because a junkie "took advantage of a tenant" and stole her keys when "she wasn't looking." This tenant not only has to pay for the front door to be re-keyed, but also for new locks and keys for all the individual suites. Nice going, Rainbow Bright. First rule of thumb, if you don't have intentions to either 1) shoot them or 2) score drugs off them because you're a desperate junkie in the making yourself, then DON'T TALK TO THE JUNKIES. They don't want any good things for you, if you've even noticed the new addition of steel muzzles on the coke dogs, you would have known as much - it's all about them.
Posted by caroline at September 14, 2006 9:34 PMI went through a period of exclusively using New York for a couple of years, but academia has broken me and now it's Times New Roman, size 12 for everything. (Watch out kids, it could happen to you!) When people use other fonts, it makes me twitchy. Even Times New Roman size 14 looks wierd. (And yes, the lack of serif on this font is making me twitchy. I love serif. Especially after having a tutorial on medieval calligraphy from this gorgeous black man a couple of summers ago... He SANG as he wrote! Just a low hum emitting from his gut, that hit all the right kundalini centres...)
Posted by: Edmorus at September 15, 2006 1:04 PMfont use depends on what you're doing and the "standards" (typeset chosen to seamlessly fit content) therein. book publication is obviously a different field than straight academia. If every book were to be published in times new roman 12 (esssscchh!) the world would be an ugly, ugly, poorly formatted place. I do, however, find times new roman/times to be very pleasing at smaller sizes. 12 pt. looks hideous (to me). At least it's not arial.
Posted by: caroline at September 15, 2006 1:36 PMalso . . .a lot of things on the web use sans serif, we should be used to it by now.
Posted by: caroline at September 15, 2006 1:37 PMHelvetica may be the superior font, but I was fooled for years into believing Arial was the one. (Mat prefered it also.) As it turns out, arial has great allure on screen, but in print and most other applications, helvetica shines brighter with it's amazing technical glory.
I passed with 53% in my typography course in college. My teacher was fond of me and I was horrible at her class.
BTW listening to new Ratatat. Pretty good.
Posted by: Xavier at September 15, 2006 4:26 PM"Freezing over"... I can see your sub-secret patterns emerging, oh smoke-curlicued one.
Posted by: Xavier at September 15, 2006 4:27 PMtypography is hard as new languages are hard. but it's . . .insanely fun? yeah, yeah it is.
xoxoxo
Posted by: caroline at September 17, 2006 9:57 PMYou'll commend me for avoiding the "Font of Knowledge" pun.
Hmm.. divination via tyography. You shall have to perform us a reading of serifs, which often = death, unless they're reversed.
Posted by: ben at September 19, 2006 9:33 PMI used to really like comic sans. you know. back in the day. now I'm partial to courier, though obviously, times roman for official business .....
Posted by: joy at September 21, 2006 2:28 AMI'm told courier is supposedly the ugliest of the fonts, but I enjoy it's uniform typerwriterness.
Posted by: ben at September 21, 2006 4:38 PMcourier is the font your computer spits out from the printer when there was some sort of error. it's ugly on the pretence that it automatically implies a mistake and mishandling of a computer.
which could i suppose work in your favour depending on what you were doing.
Well, to be honest, most of what spews out when I write -is- a mistake, so it's fairly appropriate.
Posted by: ben at September 22, 2006 6:30 PM