Typophile - American Garamond - Comments

I read somewhere that

nepenthe — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 07:39:46 -0700

I read somewhere that Jalleau has digitized the Jannon you are referring to, but I don’t think they make their digitizations publicly available.

This is the “Garamont” I’m working on now:

PS I always like the No 3

Stefan Seifert — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 04:35:52 -0700

I always like the No 3 Italic for it is full of life like some others (diverse angles etc.),
yet it is slightly wider in its rythm which I appreciate.
Imprimerie cursive is too narrow in my eyes.
The Roman, yet, is the most wonderful Garamont of all.

Stefan

Hi J P, thanks for the

Stefan Seifert — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 04:31:21 -0700

Hi J P,

thanks for the links.
I would love to see something of your work on Garamond(t).
Are there digital versions of the Imprimerie Garamonts?

Salute
Stefan

There are a number of good

nepenthe — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:22:22 -0700

There are a number of good digital versions of this American “Garamond” available. Here are a few of the better ones:

http://www.fyrisfonts.com/typsnitt/garajannon/book.asp (Multiple master available)
http://www.p22.com/lanston/garamont.html (best for lager sizes—too light and squished together out of the box to be useable for text)

Neither of these fonts really look anything like either Garamond’s or Jannon’s fonts, IMO.

The standard “Garamond #3” is terribly ugly at anything larger than 10 pt.

I’m currently working on a digital font that is based on ATF Garamont, but is somewhat different than the ones currently out there. I will not likely release it.

The version from the Impemerie Nationale is stunning, expecially the italic when set with the full range of ligatures.

The thing which most bugs me

Eluard — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:22:20 -0800

The thing which most bugs me about this sample of Garamond 3 is the HUGE counter of the p. It is even larger than the q, which is large enough. You could drive a coach and four through it! Some keen typophile should bookmark this one as needing a better digitalisation. :)

Stefan, I took some time to

eeblet — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:51:47 -0800

Stefan, I took some time to get cozier with Jannon’s lean-y italic, and I’ve decided I really like it at text sizes. Thanks for the Google search terms. ;)

I always liked especially

Stefan Seifert — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 01:43:40 -0800

I always liked especially Garamond Cursives for their irregularities.
Can’t help it.
I find Adobes Garamond boring and charmeless.

Hail to Jean Jannon!!
Do you know the beautiful types of Imprimerie Nationale, Paris?
Fantastic stuff!

Stefan

I don’t view the italic

eeblet — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:51:31 -0800

I don’t view the italic “a”s as mistakes, but they are distracting enough that I have trouble reading “while comparing apples to apples”. That said, in a book size it’s a whole different story.

Garamond No.3 isn’t based

gulliver — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 05:58:36 -0800

Garamond No.3 isn’t based on a type of Claude Garamond’s at all. It’s based on the types of Jean Jannon, in a century after Garamond’s.

As Robert Bringhurst points out in “The Elements of Typographic Style”, Jannon’s type belongs to the French Baroque era rather than Garamond’s type, which has more Renaissance characteristics. Subsequently, Jannon’s type has a rowdier form, especially in the italics, and these dissimilar slopes and stresses in the italic were deliberate design elements, not simply sloppy mistakes.

Other types drawing from this same era have similar characteristics. Check out the italic of the various Caslon text types (Adobe Caslon, ITC Founders Caslon). Many of these same characteristics lasted into Calson’s Neoclassical (“transitional”) types as well.

As for Garamond 3, it is drawn closely from ATF’s “Garamond” (Jannon) revival of the early 20th century, although as noted, it suffers from lighter drawing of many early digital revivals. I prefer Simoncini Garamond and Monotype Garamond for most uses — they keep the lively structure of Jannon’s letterforms, but seem much better weighted and balanced for text.

For good versions of Claude Garamond’s types, I find Adobe Garamond to be a fine typeface.

David Thometz

Which a do you mean? Stefan

Stefan Seifert — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 05:30:27 -0800

Which a do you mean?

Stefan

Those “a”s are bad

eeblet — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:10:12 -0800

Those “a”s are bad apples - they’ll spoil the bunch.

Don’t use Adobe Garamond

Stefan Seifert — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:19:39 -0800

Don’t use Adobe Garamond ;-)
A very functional but lousy typeface.

Stefan

If you have to settle on a

Robert Trogman — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:36:50 -0800

If you have to settle on a version of Garamond there is always Adobe Garamond—a rehash of American Garamond.

Originally the no3 Garamond

Stefan Seifert — Wed, 6 Feb 2008 01:41:01 -0800

Originally the no3 Garamond is very beautiful. I liked it always a lot.
Very charming in its irregularities.
Obviously digital versions (as always always always..) are way too thin and sharp.
Yet the no3 is a very good typeface in my eyes.
Look at the older photosetting versions.

Stefan

I think some of the quirks

Mark Simonson — Tue, 5 Feb 2008 11:08:56 -0800

I think some of the quirks of this Garamond (No. 3) are being exaggerated by font hinting in your sample.

No. 3 is my least favorite Garamond, especially the digital version. I would put it a notch lower than ITC Garamond even.

American Garamond

75th Trombone — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:35:54 -0800

Hi, I’m nothing but a typography wannabe, but I find myself with a very strong opinion about a typeface lately, and I want validation of my taste.

So check this out:

This is a sample of American Garamond, or Garamond #3, or whatever the original name of it is, and its italic. I just got through reading three novels set in this, and I emerged with an acute desire to express my opinion on it, and solicit the opinions of real typographers to see if my instincts are good.

So. Before I opine, I want to know what y’all think. My sample text demonstrates what I want to point out, but I’m sure some of you guys have more extensive experience with this typeface to speak from. :)