Jump to content
The latest typography links delivered straight to your inbox.

Univers, Linotype Univers and Univers Next

Recommended Posts

Iain Farnsworth

Thought this thread had died, only to find it resurrected!

Otmar, thanks so much for your inside knowledge on Univers. It certainly does help clear up some of the mysteries of the 'old' digital Univers, such as the ampersand. How could anybody complain about Frutiger's lovely 'Et'? It's one of my favourite features of Univers, and a reasons why I regret having purchased a few weights of the old version.

As an employee of Linotype, I'm not sure you'll feel inclined to answer the following, but I'll ask it in case you do (indeed, if anyone has any insights on this)...

What was the deal with Berthold Univers' disappearance from the marketplace? I believe it was a favourite of some Univers officianados (such I Willi Kunz, I think). I know there was some kind of legal dispute, but I wondered why Bitstream still sell Univers (albeit by another name - Zurich), yet Berthold has withdrawn it's offering. Anyway, thought I'd put that out there.

Link to comment
Chris Dean

Did you know that Univers would have been todays Helvetica?

I had a few conversations with Mike Parker about his time with Linotype, and of course, Times & Starling, and he wanted Univers to be their typeface of choice, but the italics were to italic to work on their machines properly.

Cool eh?

Link to comment
quadibloc

Incidentally, the Selectric Composer provides an illustrative example of how a variety of typeface designs fare when subjected to a similar (but more severe) set of constraints than those to which Sabon was subject.

1) Type elements contained only 88 characters, and so the same unit system applied to Roman, Italic, and Bold weights of every typeface.

2) The device employed a 9-unit system. However, this was not twice as coarse as the Monotype 18-unit system; instead, most letters were assigned widths comparable to those used for Times Roman, scaled down from 18 units to the em to 11 units to the em.

3) Hence, the letters m, M, and W were narrower than they should have been to be in the correct proportion, being 9 units wide rather than 11, in order to fit on the type element (it being desired to support type sizes up to 11 points, and to use the same basic type element as used in normal Selectric typewriters).

I just thought it would be worth citing this example in this thread, as comparing Press Roman to Times Roman, and so on, might give a benchmark for the potential impact of technical constraints on Sabon, and how well Jan Tschichold did in overcoming them.

EDIT: Oh, yes - here's the link

http://ibmcomposer.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=56

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Our partners

Get to your apps and creative work. Explore curated inspiration, livestream learning, tutorials, and creative challenges.
Discover the Best Deals for Freelance Designers.
The largest selection of professional fonts for any project. Over 130,000 available fonts, and counting.
Discover the fonts from the Germany foundry FDI Type. A brand of Schriftkontor Ralf Herrmann.
Pavillon Gotisch: Available to supporters of Typography.guru.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We are placing functional cookies on your device to help make this website better.