Mercator by Dick Dooijes

[Darkgreenblue]

Of all the classic grotesques and neo-grotesques shown in Jaspert/Berry/Johnson's Encyclopaedia and Rookledge's Typefinder, I think Mercator is my favorite. The forms of the C, R and S are much more attractive than in either Helvetica or Univers, in my opinion, as are the numerals, and I like the proportions and spacing. As the icing on the cake, Mercator has a wonderful Q design unlike that of any other typeface I have seen. I find it very simple and beautiful, and am surprised nobody has copied this Q idea in any newer sans (though Puyfoulhoux's Q in Alinea Sans is similar). The Univers Q always looks like a mistake to me, and most sans Q's are boring, but Mercator's is lovely.

Is a revived offering, as mentioned by folks above, likely to make commercial headway anytime soon? People keep trying to create alternatives to Helvetica, to solve its quirky problems and to coax users away from its domination; it seems to me that a great choice might be right there in the books, that other late-50's design, Mercator.

[Stephen Coles]

I can get with you on the 'Q' and 'R', but I don't see how that 'S' is more attractive than Helvetica’s. Maybe you're looking at one of Helv’s more compromised digital weights. Have a look at Neue Haas Grotesk.

[Counterform]

Atlas Grotesk, a Mercator revival by Kai Bernau, Susana Carvalho and Christian Schwartz. The capital S is narrower than the original one, but the Q and R are really similar.

http://commercialtype.com/typefaces/atlas/grotesk

[Darkgreenblue]

Thank you -- Atlas is interesting, and key letters such as the C and Q are close, but not quite the same. I still find the original Mercator more attractive. I just love love love that Mercator Q -- it's like driving a track around and around, and then at some point you make a smooth, elegant exit.

To Stephen's comment above, I must say I do like NHG better in bold (and the bolder Helvetica weights also), but lighter weights are more disappointing. The regular S is beaten by Mercator's in my opinion, and so is the regular C, which I always thought ugly in Helvetica (barely less so in NHG).

[oldnick]

This is a very interesting discussion, with some very fine insights—mostly based on some very fine distinctions between and among some very thoughtful type designs. But, who is right and who is wrong about those fine distinctions boils down to which oenophile is right about which fruit precisely describes the top note in a fine wine. It all boils down to a matter of opinion. So what: pay attention and you'll learn something.

However, one aspect of the discussion does not make sense. If you're looking for something truly unique—which is kinda OTT, since “unique” is like “pregnant" in its all-or-nothingness—it will be so for only so long. Which is to say, it will be unique up the time that until other folks looking for something unique learn from your discovery. In which case, more and more people who are convinced that “unique” means buying all the same stuff the cool people buy—in other words, Apple’s whoel marketing strategy—the net result is, what was once unique is no longer so, and you have to start out on your Grail quest all over again. Still: it's the journey, not the destination, right? Unless you actually have to be somewhere at a specific time on a specific date. THEN, it's the destination.

If, perchance, you have a hard time making sense out of what I just said, join the club.