Bendy Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 If you mean Commercial Type (Christian Schwartz with Paul Barnes), I'd say it's one of the cleanest, most efficiently designed foundry sites out there. The type speaks for itself, no extra fluffing necessary, I really admire it.
hrant Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 James, it's hard to figure out whether talent or skill (AKA training & experience) is more important (especially since it's the former than often leads one to the latter) but I certainly agree that skill is very important (which is why I mentioned it in my first post - I just forgot later on). Knowing all that information doesn't make it any less ugly to the eye. Only for eyes that are deaf. How is it statistically rare? If let's say 10% of people are good at one thing, and 10% are good at something else, 1% will be good at both. Now, there is some overlap between type design and graphic design so the numbers wouldn't be so drastic, but what I'm saying is the overlap is far less than it might seem. Ryan, my work is hard to find online because it's hard to find anywhere: it's niche, but most of all there frankly isn't much of it (and most of it isn't worth publicizing much). BTW that's probably why some people get flustered and leave Typophile, saying that I don't "deserve" the airtime. I can explain why that logic is flawed, but I'd rather not turn this thread into a discussion of me. One thing to keep in mind here is that the more niche you are the less likely a "fancy" website matters. We're not selling Toyotas here. Consider this: what kind of people would spontaneously decide to hire John H. if he had a highly sophisticated site? That's not the type of customer he's likely to be useful to. Word of mouth* remains essential for type designers. * Which luckily no longer has to be done in person. slow down the speed Use a medium the way it serves you, and don't try to bend it into something it can't do for you. If you're selling print fonts the best -and perhaps only- thing a site can do for you is leave a positive first impression; the rest has to be done via other channels. hhp
Ryan Maelhorn Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 they just need to slow down the speed at which it changes (one font into another). I need at least 4 times the current length to evaluate one of their type samples. Maybe I'm just slow. :D
Ryan Maelhorn Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 type is a still thing. *** Explanation is Explanation. Explanation is not Great Art. In fact to a bewildering extent, Great Art is unexplainable. Even an attempt to explain art exits the world of art and enters into the world of culture.
John Hudson Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Great Art? I thought we were talking about graphic design and, more specifically, website design. I made the point re Jeremy's pattern design that it is a very successful piece of branding design, and whether you think it is ugly -- I don't -- is irrelevant to a discussion of its design merits, because it wouldn't be a Jeremy Tankard website without it.
Ryan Maelhorn Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Also, Schwartz's site is presented in a rather uniteresting setting, and changes so fast you can't really judge what you're looking at before it changes into something else. Font Font's site is visually decent, but cumbersome as far as user interaction. Hrant's work is like nonexistent on the web. I had to go looking for fonts he designed, using carefully designed google queries, rather than simply being served all his work upon googling his name, other than the few on his site, that is. Shinntype has been down for like what, half a year now? And dont even get me started on how shody my own web pressence is...
Indra Kupferschmid Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 How many of the aforementioned websites use webfonts?
peggo Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 In my culture exist a famous phrase "In the smith's house, wood knife" ("En casa de herrero, cuchillo de palo") My commom sense explain me this because exist at least few powerful reason for this situation: 1. Web desing is very different technical area compared to type design. 2. Most type designer spend long long time working at type design and web design also need long time working at. 3. Most sell activity of type designers occur through another bigger well designed websites (specialist on font sell business only). 4. The cost of good web design most of the time is high to type designers profits. 5. Web design (code managing) look a problem so complicated, and solve that by simplest (but ugly) way. I guess the list is bigger but so leave this until here... Pedro
Mark Simonson Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 Mine doesn't use webfonts yet, but will be soon. I've done my own website design in the past, and I think I was okay at it, but as I've moved more of my focus to type design, I've fallen behind on web design and production techniques. I also find that the more time I spend working on fonts, the less time (and interest) I have for working on my site. Consequently, I'm working with an outside web designer. (Not sure when the new site will launch.) Incidentally, the Commercial Type site (which I think is very nice) was not designed by Schwartz or Barnes, but by an outside firm.
Typogruffer Posted October 6, 2012 Author Posted October 6, 2012 @hrant: It's good but not my type of web design. I didn't like those try and buy buttons trailing my cursor (kinda irritating actually).
Renaissance Man Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 > Nick: "...if you can’t do so in a civil manner." The pot calling the kettle black.
Ryan Maelhorn Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 I kind of like the OurType site as fa as user interaction, but feel its too distracting for type. It'd be great for advertising some new MTV reality show.
dezcom Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 In my case, my old dated and never completed website was done back before CSS was so capable and screen resolution was much less. That makes everything look quite small by today's standards. Back then, I was tech-savvy enough to do table-based web designs but have not kept up with the times and practices today. I just don't have time to learn all the new web stuff so it lays there like time capsule, frozen to change.
Typogruffer Posted October 6, 2012 Author Posted October 6, 2012 @dezcom: I can't see the specimens of your typefaces like Leporello, Weimar Plakat 1923 etc
dezcom Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 "...I can't see the specimens of your typefaces like Leporello," I never posted them because I never released them. I told you my site was a dead time capsule ;-) You will also notice that fonts I have released are not even mentioned :-/
Nick Shinn Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 Steve: "The pot calling the kettle black." Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think I'm in the habit of insulting other Typophile posters.
Renaissance Man Posted October 7, 2012 Posted October 7, 2012 No, Nick, you're not "in the habit of insulting other Typophile posters." I like you. I have your Goodchild font. But I did see at least one really nasty exchange that almost convinced me to not buy any more of your fonts. It was so over the top that I never forgot it.
Ryan Maelhorn Posted October 7, 2012 Posted October 7, 2012 I can only find three font families from you, Dez. Are there more? http://www.myfonts.com/foundry/Dezcom/
Nick Cooke Posted October 8, 2012 Posted October 8, 2012 I didn't have my own site for 10 years because I was half-heartedly messing about trying to come up with some designs myself. They were all crap. I realised I didn't have the skills required to make it how I sort of imagined. I finally got enough money together to hire some professionals to do it, and I'm glad I did. I couldn't possibly have put it all together with the functionality plus e-commerce. I tried to be a jack-of-all-trades, but realised I wasn't. Sometimes you have to realise that you can't do everything, and if you don't want to look like an amateur - hire a professional.
_null Posted October 8, 2012 Posted October 8, 2012 This can't be...Nick(s), Andrea, Chris, the legends that faced down some of the trickiest opentype, and produced the finest contours I ever did clap eyes on are ceding defeat to writing some HTML? This makes me sad. I think y'all should get yourself some twitter bootstrap and start tinkering. The world can and will wait for you to complete the Hungarian extension to your typeface...come on, tell me the thought of showing off your typefaces with proper control over your line spacing, drop caps, ligatures and opentype features on the web doesn't make you all a little hot under the collar. Fix up! If anything web-design has gotten easier in the past three years... Strip everything right back, go for a minimum viable product and slowly introduce content back as you get more confident. For the record...my site doesn't suck. I think. It sucks less than most anyway.
Mark Simonson Posted October 8, 2012 Posted October 8, 2012 Very good point (and nice site, too). I would have said the same thing a few years ago. For me, it is just a matter of how I want to spend my time. After years of doing my site myself, I just realized I would rather be working on fonts, and that I can afford to hire someone else to do the other stuff, someone who is better than me at it. (BTW, I like how you used my font Coquette in one of your very nice lettering pieces, except that you called it Cochin.)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now