Peter: Nice. And what about Raffia Initials? What I wonder though is whether those are a different animal, since they don't seem to be trying to make surfaces; to me it looks like laying down multiple pieces to create the impression of a letter. But maybe they're all on the same continuum.
BTW concerning Quintet, I wonder if Okano realizes how fundamentally different it is to the rest of KABK's output. Looking at the images in the ILT interview I would say that going from that double-pencil "B"* to the shapes in the actual font is a qualitatively huge leap. It's like walking versus flying.
Michael, can you provide examples? Of course it's not impossible that drawing the outlines (as opposed to the bodies) of letters chirographically is old news, but lacking any examples I would have to think you're wrong.
And another paperclip font!http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/letterbox/morice-round/
Being the first claim to the invention of napkin-drawing on a surface, I do not think the insignificance of this should be overestimated.
404 - Not Found
Definitely look like a treble clef.
This is exactly the way I would draw a treble clef on musical sheets when I compose.
@hrant:Quickie trivia question: what (mainstream) writing system has glyphs
based (partly) on the shapes of the mouth/tongue/lips when saying the
sound in question?
Korean hangul, of course, although the non-mainstream system of "Visible Speech" is likely known to more people in North America as having this attribute.
Dates back to the 1600's Hrant. Because of their shape they had to be "drawn" (outline) with a fine cut quill and filled in. The shapes we unachievable with a wide pen, although they were a nod to the Trajan Roman incorporating the nuances of the Uncial.
They were used to "start a verse."
There is a contemporary adaptation in the Chesapeake Corporation logo on my site, typerror.com, if you flip through the lettering section. They are quite popular today amongst practitioners.
Michael, unless you can provide an actual image few people can decide if you're right.
Of the examples I've seen the oldest is Excoffon's (I think). But frankly to me this isn't about who was first; I'd just like to grasp the implications.
Manuscripts are loaded with them. I have given you enough info go look for yourself. Edward Johnston wrote of them, and their history, in the early 1900's so I think that precedes Roger!
By Ellmer Stefan:https://twitter.com/ellmerstefan/status/562552193182486528
I believe Johnston starts on Versals around page 119. This book is from the early 1900's. I believe these pages were done around 1903.
So I guess I was not wrong, huh!
Oh, and Zapf and a host of others were doing them before Excoffon. They appear in many books, printed about calligraphers, in the 1800's. The Russians, Estonians and Finnish had a real affection for them.
Actually they preceded the 14th century!
Thanks for the link. But I have to say that's not the same thing - it just shows the drafting of outlines (which obviously has been happening for centuries). The main idea in this thread (to me) is the free-form chirographic rendering of outlines; sort of how chirographers think of the black, but applied to the outline (which has no thickness). One thing to look for is "funny" crossings of outlines (and not the sort that happens when you're marking the black - like the "o" in Peter's example).
But more potential examples would be great. The thing is if you have a point to make I think you should make the effort to provide evidence. I don't go on a wild-goose chase when I can't even hear the goose.
"one's a genius, the other's insane..."
but seriously, i am trying to figure out what a "protoglyph" is. a glyph is a symbol with meaning, of course, according to our very own typowiki. and proto- is a prefix meaning first, earliest, or original. furthermore, in combination with other words, it means - more or less - a foundation or basis for things which come after it or develop from it. e.g., prototype, protolanguage, etc.
are you thinking your inadvertant squiggle has a universality or flexibility to be the basis for a whole - ahem - "set" of glyphs?
I was thinking of a lorentz attractor. If you ask me to explain it I will say its a peek a boo or owl eyes.
but that's not a proto-thingy :-(
Looks a bit like a mobius strip.
Are you thinking of a 'flipped' or reversed ductus al la the moebius strip?
& on 2 infinity
That or simply "8 is enough"
or maybe it is that famous old Hollywood "Hourglass Figure"
It looks like one of those lucite high-heeled shoes that strippers wear.
Not the last Chippendale's act I saw.... ;-)
Mr Escher comes in mind
Chiro-notanic protoglyph open stroke G-clef.
Or maybe a cute little butterfly on a breezy day! :-)
Free-Hand Lissajous Figures?!
Rather than playing the guessing game, what are you thinking?
He is thinking to become a chirographer !
Yeah, get rid of the bouma for g∞d !
Check this out, maybe Aziz is on the run.
Cool protoglyphing doodling by the way !
Are you thinking what I'm thinking? That was the last election' slogan for the Conservatives in England, wasn't it? I remember there was a big billboard near my house with Howard's face and the slogan and someone had sprayed on it "Are you smoking what I'm smoking?".
Sorry, hrant, go ahead. This thread is beginning to read like a thriller. Can't wait to see how it ends.
Sorry Hrant, but I only do long distance mind-reading on Thursdays... what are you thinking? Is it about the thick/thin stroke thinning and crossing over itself – like those impossible skidlines on a slippery road sign?
Yah... what is it???
While testing a pen ... something potentially interesting struck me. Is anybody else thinking what I’m thinking?
Sure. Your pen skips.
What!? That's not it? Okay, why not shelve the guesswork games and "fess up"?
Can derive 20 of 26 alphabet characters from the thingie.
Warm, cold or Icy ?
And if this is a ball point, the ball is stuffed.
A pre-neolythic Picasso Bic peroid ?
For Paul - this is my favourite Pinky-ism:
I think so Brain. But me and Pippi Longstocking: what would the children be like?
Oh well, whatever they're like, they'll be loved.
...and the other is insane"
Actually I’m not after a glyph ID.
Then it's a model for a glyph yet to be developed, accepted and adapted for use.
But it just looks too familiar to be seen as new.
Don’t stop… Squiggle squiggle — Outhere Brothers (1995)
That, in the past, there were no plurals, rather convention dictated that nouns were the opportunity to 1. trial new pens 2. Or test that the pen they were currently using was still good for another few letters, that's how we developed our modern 's' simply through an historical misunderstanding
you don't have to tell me I got it, both you and I know
Please direct me to the correct forum.
I have a ? about fontographer. After all my work of creating my type face I am having no luck with the simple thing of making the space bar work. hopefully it is simple to you.
proto- |ˌproʊdoʊ| |ˌprəʊtəʊ| (usu. prot- before a vowel)
original; primitive : prototherian | prototype.
• first; anterior; relating to a precursor : protomartyr | protozoan.
ORIGIN from Greek prōtos ‘first.’
glyph |glif| |glɪf| |glɪf|
1 a hieroglyphic character or symbol; a pictograph : flanges painted with esoteric glyphs.
• strictly, a sculptured symbol (e.g., as forming the ancient Mayan writing system).
• Computing a small graphic symbol.
2 Architecture an ornamental carved groove or channel, as on a Greek frieze.
glyphic |ˈglifik| |ˌglɪfɪk| adjective
ORIGIN late 18th cent. (sense 2) : from French glyphe, from Greek gluphē ‘carving.’
Maybe you are thinking about getting into interior decorating...?
Or, maybe you are thinking that if you post a vague question you will get a lot of funny, wrong answers... ?
nothing good to say so trash talk rules
oh yeah thanks for nothing
I think Duncan was posting in response to the thread not your question. I did send you an instant message to suggest you visit the Build forum with your query.http://typophile.com/forum/6
Tim thanks for your advice, but no in reality Duncan could have easily said what you said but no, insults rule. I am not surprised.