The Difference between Humanist, Transitional and Modern Typefaces

Some key-characters for classifying typefaces are a, e, and R.

Humanist (Serifs, Sans, Slab) a’s mostly have an open upper counter and a rather small bowl; the lower half of the e has an open, friendly »mouth«, whereas the eye in the upper half is usually small. R has a diagonal, often long, maybe swashy tail. The uppercase letters are all of different widths, following the proportions of inscriptional Imperial Roman capitals (Capitalis Monumentalis).
If the typeface has contrast the stroke is likely to be thickest north-east and south-west (rotational symmetric, you can draw a diagonal line trough the thinnest parts). In the venetian subclass the e has a diagonal crossbar.
If the typeface has serifs they are bracketed and often asymmetric.

Transitional typefaces have more regular forms. The a and e are rather open, but in general the letters are not as lively and divers as in a humanist face. R has a diagonal tail, the widths of the uppercase are more equal. Stroke contrast is mostly symmetrical to a vertical axis. Serifs are bracketed and also more symmetrical. These typefaces stand inbetween Humanist and Modern, hence the name.

Modern typefaces, like Didones but also Grotesques have rather closed forms of e and a. Caps are of the same widths and more narrow, also the lowercase letters look comparatively alike (b, d, p, q). The R has a more vertical leg [I miss the proper english terms for that].
In the Didone style the stroke contrast is extremely high with a vertical axis, serifs are very thin and not bracketed. There is a subclass with bracketed serifs, like Century for instance, for which we are all still looking for a good name.

Dieser Eintrag wurde veröffentlicht in Ask, Type und getagged , , , , . Bookmarken: Permanent-Link. Kommentieren oder ein Trackback hinterlassen: Trackback-URL.

2 Kommentare

  1. kupfers
    Erstellt am 7. April 2010 um 12:44 | Permanent-Link

    Thanks Dan for correcting my worst phrases.

  2. Erstellt am 7. April 2010 um 14:42 | Permanent-Link

    Regarding “Capitalis,” Paul Shaw sort of comments on those in one of his notes here. He uses the term “inscriptional Imperial Roman capitals.” I like that.

    “The uppercase letters are all of different widths, following the proportions of inscriptional Imperial Roman capitals.”

Ein Trackback

  1. [...] Dieser Eintrag wurde auf Twitter von Lukelux erwähnt. Lukelux sagte: The Difference between Humanist, Transitional and Modern Typefaces http://bit.ly/d32h0E [...]

Ihr Kommentar

Ihre E-Mail wird niemals veröffentlicht oder verteilt. Benötigte Felder sind mit * markiert

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>