"Hardware" for typographers

[hrant]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUTXb-ga1fo

hhp

[typerror]

Did not think you would and that paints you as a demagogue... poor choice of word, it implies leadership and I don't see that in you or your work.

[Chris Dean]

@hrant: Battle!

[typerror]

Nope, no battle. Vacate an argument before you look as bad as the antagonist. There is quite a bit of arrogance in anyone who advocates in the face of proven methods of achievement and denigrates those who chose an alternate, yet viable path. And LL is just plain idiot on parade!

[typerror]

hrant
18 Dec 2011 — 12:46pm

I avoid YouTube like the plague - sorry not to click.

Tee hee!!!!!!!!!!

[John Hudson]

Thanks for the link to that old thread, Hrant. I'd forgotten all about it. I suspect there is enough content for a book among the things that I've written on Typophile that I don't remember writing. Heck, some of it I don't even remember thinking. I am particularly proud of this contribution to that thread, though, which I think is one of the best things I've said on the subject of the 'software' of type design:

I think that Gerrit Noordzij's theory of the stroke provides one very strong analytical tool: one which I use every day when making decisions about shapes. Perhaps more importantly, I was instinctively looking at shapes in this way for many years before I read Noordzij's formulation of the theory. What Noordzij did was to expand my analysis, so that I saw and understood things that I had previously missed. Crucially, I think Noordzij has described the hermeneutic tradition within which type design exists, and has done so in a way that is independent of the lore, legend, personalities and advertising copy that make up much 'typographic history'. As I wrote earlier in this thread, a hermeneutic tradition is not something from which one can escape, and in some ways one is most deeply embedded in that tradition when one is critiquing it and finding reasons for rejecting it or extending it.

[Chris Dean]

Obviously it’s hard to pick up on playful, sarcastic, tongue in cheek jesting. Yeesh!

[John Hudson]

I have a few Pilot Parallel pens, but I find only the larger ones very useful. The Pilot nibs are not as thin perpendicular to width as traditional nibs, so at smaller sizes the results are lower contrast than I like and tend to look a bit gummy.

PS. The little piece of thin plastic provided with the pens to clean between the nib sections is essential. Don't lose it.

[typerror]

.

:-) Get that Christopher? I got yours, just don't need anyone "fanning the flames." I am trying to explain to the "eye" that he isn't creating a safe haven for "everyone," no matter what his agenda is. He does not get that!

[hrant]

Noordzij's formulation is indeed extremely valuable in understanding what has been. Paradoxically it's also valuable because it makes it easier to escape the fallacy that is chirography; it's easier to overcome something when you know exactly what it is, and we all owe Noordzij that. The past cannot escape from tradition, but the future can, and it always does eventually. I just hope to be alive to see this particular tradition go the way of the tasty but stupid Dodo.

hhp

[hrant]

Re-reading that, I have to apologize for being too dismissive. I guess Michael's frothing berserker philosophy of life can be infectious.

Ideas never die - at most they go dormant. And I'm not even sure I would enjoy the total absence of chirography. There will always be a place for it - always some people who will make chirographic type, much of it nice to look at. My real contention is -and has long been- that the idea of chirography gets too much mileage it doesn't deserve, and there's not enough exposition of its drawbacks. I often position myself at extremes not because I'm an extremist at heart, but essentially as a well-meaning slap in the face, aimed at people I expect more from.

Thankfully there is a growing, if rag-tag guerrilla army of what I've been calling "liminographers": designers who consciously violate chirography in favor of the direct creation of notan. This "anti" stance is merely an initial reaction. Eventually type will be made by people who simply ignore chirography, and it will be my own favorite kind.

hhp

[Chris Dean]

@hrant: For those not in the know, can you please define what you mean when you use the terms “chirography” and “notan?”

[cuttlefish]

Chirography
Notan
and for good measure, since it seems to come up a lot outside the discussion of rhinoceros enclosures
Bouma

[cuttlefish]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boma_(enclosure)

[sendoushi]

@cuttlefish: concepts hard to fully understand ehehe

This blog thread is really flowing eheh

Guys, what about rulers? Do you use gliders and stuff? What do you use?

[chrisburton]

@chrisburton: What technique do you use? The scribble at 30 degrees? Do you find yourself doing more sans-serif, calligraphy, serif...? That lead holder seems pretty interesting. How is the weight and those things?

@joelsantos I don't use pens so Calligraphy is out of the question. My work strictly consists of script lettering at this time. The Staedtler lead holder I mentioned above is quite phenomenal. It's pretty lightweight for me and doesn't feel too big in my fingertips. I would absolutely agree with @ChristopherDean about the tub sharpener. The lead holder itself has one attached however, it leaves shavings everywhere and all over your fingers (potentially smudged on your paper as well if you're not careful).

As for rulers, I just use an ordinary stainless steel one.

Side Note: Does anyone know of a modern electric lead pointer? Here is one that Doyald Young used but it's really old. http://leadholder.com/point-kroy.html

[John Hudson]

Jason, the Typowiki entry on notan is a good explication of the word's common meaning and origins. Hrant's usage carries with it a number of additional assertions, which I think result in question begging when presented as such, but which are due proper consideration when posed as questions. So, for example, near the beginning of this thread Hrant asserts that notan ' is determined solely by the border between black and white', from which he infers then that outline drawing ('liminography) is the only way to attain notan in type design. Now, clearly, neither the first assertion nor the inference is implied by the common understanding of notan as derived from East Asian aesthetics of dark and light, as outlined in the Typowiki. Notan is something that exists whenever light and dark are present in direct relationship, so obviously exists in all typically contrasted text, whatever the means of its making. In terms of traditional use of the term, what matters are canons of beauty associated with notan, and hence it makes eminent sense to talk about notan in the context of calligraphy; indeed, this is one of the main uses of the term in Japanese aesthetics, and serves to link calligraphy with sumi-e and other styles of painting that make use of light and dark relationships, and with traditional design practices. Hrant's use of the term, then, must be seen as novel or idiosyncratic, although I don't think there's anything wrong with that and find it a useful shorthand term for referring to something like 'the relationship of structure and space in type design, in which structure is presumed to be black and space white, or some similar dark/light contrast'. The problem I have with Hrant's use isn't its novelty or its independence of the common usage, but the question begging that goes into his secondary assertions and inferences. When these are rephrased as questions, the whole topic becomes more interesting to me and opens on to possible dialogue:

Is notan a functional concept in reading? In what way?

Is this functionality enhanced or impeded by (para)chirographically achieved notan?

What other design processes might be used to create typographic forms?

How do you establish criteria for functionally good notan in a writing system independent of writing?

There are other questions that follow from these.

[hrant]

As much as I admire Eastern cultures, the proper separation of notan from painting is indeed a paradox they need to resolve (I mean in type, not calligraphy). The upcoming ATypI conference is an ideal opportunity for this. But I'm not holding my breath.

(I'll get to your questions very soon.)

hhp

[sendoushi]

@chrisburton I also have a Staedtler lead holder. It must be almost the same but maybe your's is more confortable since mine isn't rounded. Anyway, it's my main drawing tool at the moment, the lead holder. Need a good fine point also. Mine are all over and I hate micron.

[cuttlefish]

Back on the original topic: I've used T-squares, triangles, drafting machines that fulfill the roles of both. These days nearly all my graphics work is done with computers, but some of my old drafting tools find uses in painting (proportional dividers are practically a requirement, as far as I'm concerned).

[sendoushi]

Proportional dividers? hmmmm what do you use them for?

[cuttlefish]

scaling, enlarging and reducing, sectioning, among other things.
A machined aluminum proportional divider like the one I inherited is ridiculously expensive, but I've seen some cheap plastic ones in the past which should serve the purpose just as well.

[sendoushi]

http://www.bicworld.com/en/products/details/96/criterium-2-mm The one that i've been using

[John Hudson]

A reducing lens is a useful thing. It enables one to print large and then get a sense of how it will look at text size at higher resolution than your printer is capable of.

[Ryan Maelhorn]

By far the best hardware a type designer could own would be one of those 3d printers that can print into a plastic cube.