Font prices will drop dramatically this year, for several reasons:

1. slowdown in the US economy
2. increased competition
3. ongoing effect of “filesharing/pay-what-you-can is good promotion” scam

4. Widespread availability of delicious cake.

I’ve not seen any of this cake yet Haley. ;^)

5. Those designers who once licensed their fonts through ITC are now realizing they can get more than ITC’s paltry royalty when selling on their own, even if the retail price is cut in half.

Where is he selling them from?

http://www.stonetypefoundry.com/

For what it is worth, I have used the old Cycles a fair bit. My only grumble is that is is a bit thin with direct-to-plate printing, which is quite understandable given that Sumner made it in the repro days. I have the new Cycles in various sizes, but have not used it so cannot confirm my impression it will still be a tiny bit thin with DTP printing. But I have this complaint about lightness-when-printed with a lot of fonts; other may find it just to their taste.

Have also used Stone Print for a long text. Wonderful font if you don’t specify the measure too long. You can really pack in the characters, to either save space (book length) or increase margins.

San Francisco Public Library looks very interesting, in between Cycles and Stone Print in terms of how condensed it is. There is a fair need for slightly condensed fonts, and SFPL looks like it might fit the bill for this.

I have been using Magma Compact for a few books now, and like that too. I’ve used it paired with Quadraat, and for a companion display sans, like it better than Quadraat sans.

As to ITC — Sumner once remarked that he had to license the Stone “clan” (Stone regular, sans, and informal) back from ITC in order to sell them, even though he was the designer.

All in all, I think there are some good bargains here on some pretty darn good fonts.

Thanks James.

I can hazard a guess why Stone’s font site is becalmed. The older serif text faces have been around a long time and nobody needs to acquire them here. But the newer ones, which ought to be flying off the shelf on merit alone, offer deal-breaking problems of incompleteness and formatting.

SFPL, very attractive, lacks a bold italic. What happens when some Bay Area librarian wants bold italic? Does her boss reply, “Mister Stone said you won’t need it”? And consider Cycles from a type consumer’s viewpoint: what the f——?! Of the four optical weight text families, only Cycles nine and eleven have even a semibold roman, and none has a semibold italic. And that blizzard of specialty fonts for fractions and tabular this and that could all have been folded into an OpenType version by now, which Stone does not offer. Compare Cycles against its nearest competitor, Arno Pro by Slimbach: not only complete in OpenType, but more than complete! For this reason, Arno will probably also kick Requiem’s ass, even though Requiem is superior on details—R still has no bold or bold italic.

While I am always for more flexible type families, I don’t think a lack of bold italic is really a big sticking point. Cycles is essentially a book face and bold italic is almost never used in book typography. And, to be honest, there is really very little reason to use it elsewhere.

“bold italic is almost never used in book typography”

I have just finished my 12th non-fiction book design, and every single one of those 12 manuscripts required bold AND bold italic somewhere. And, believe me, the client does not want to hear that the designer of that typeface he liked so much refuses to supply bold italics! Stone certainly did so before (Stone Serif’s bold italics look better than their romans!) so I can’t understand his attitude now. It’s a crowded market; purchasers would like to be free to use a book face on other editorial work; nobody has to buy something released incomplete.

Coles>

Typically what can a type designer expect as (royalty) payment at the various foundries? And Myfonts?

In the art work world, it’s typically 60% for the artist and 40% for the gallery.

Mikey :-)

Mondo, it seems that you like to use bold italic and it’s a bit of a hobby horse.
But assuming one’s own experience is typical is a non-sequitur, to put it mildly.
While there may be some truth in what you say, it’s pushing it a bit to state, as you often do, that typefaces without a bold italic are “incomplete”. Someone else, who uses mice type or display type a lot, might consider these potential family members indispensible. Then there are those who want language support. And others who can’t do without small caps, or old-style figures. And so on. Ultimately, a good typographer knows what features and styles are present in typefaces, and designs to these capabilties and strengths.

Mondo, can you please stop moaning about the whole Bold Italic thing? It’s getting rather tiresome. Perhaps you could stick to the ’industry standard’ of Times New Roman—not only does it have a Bold Italic, it is also style linked for your typographic convenience! It’s also probably on your computer now—and you don’t need to pay a single cent to those nasty, money-grubbing typeface designers!

—K

> In the art work world, it’s typically 60% for the artist and 40% for the gallery.

Type is not art.

While I’m the first to cry out for as many weights as I can get, particularly bold italics, I’ve successfully used Whitman as the sole typeface in the corporate identity of a financial client (3 1/2 years running). It’s certainly possible, if you have enough control over the situation and are willing to walk some people through it. It’s also a nice test of one’s skills to find alternate solutions. However, I will admit that it creates certain limitations, such as no titles in bold heads, etc.

Some typefaces, such as the aforementioned Requiem, are designed in such a way that heavier weights would violate the purpose/ spirit of the face, so those marketing them should be up front about the intended specialized use. Requiem is a book face (and I’ve seen it do a fantastic job in books like Cloud Atlas), so the only reason to add weights to a family like that is to increase sales, not to truly serve the user.

That being said, I have had clients who balked at a type choice with that ’limitation’. If I write about a type family, I always mention its range and note the lack of any expected weights/ styles, as should anyone reviewing type. As a type consumer, I can attest that offering a family without a bold italic will limit a typeface’s appeal/ sales, particularly amongst non-typophiles. But the worlds is full of choices, so why kvetch?

> bold italic is almost never used in book typography

It can if the book is a text, or something using subheads. Your subhead style is set to bold, and then you have a word or two that need italics.

I agree that it would rarely appear in the running text.

I purchased Bodoni 6 last night to round out my ITC Bodoni collection. Those are tremendous prices!

I think, MondoB, you assume that if you say 1,000 times that bold and bold italic are necessary and are “deal breakers if absent” that it will sound as though 1,000 people have all separately and independently clamored for bold and bold italic. Not so.

To share my own experience — I often will not buy the bold and bold italic even when they are available. Titling and small caps are far, far more important to me. I have used bold italic once in a book design and it worked quite well, but it is not indispensible. Almost always, I think, it is better to do without them. There is now a proliferation of what could best be described as the Word-document-design-aesthetic and it is the new ugliness.

Thus I was quite disappointed to find that the new edition of the Scifi novel Dune used bold italic on epigraphs. It is a step in the wrong direction, I think: it looked better before.

I’m sure that bold and bold italic have their place, but that place is not at the very center of book design.

I’m sure that bold and bold italic have their place…

I’m pretty sure bold italic feels at home in a nation where all of the men wear belts and suspenders.

Thank you Sumner!

Type is not art.

I have seen some that I’d be willing to consider art.

Okay, so, what and how can a type designer expect to be paid?

>type is not art

Type can be both art and craft, I think. It doesn’t have to be either-or. The best is probably both.

Your subhead style is set to bold, and then you have a word or two that need italics.

No need for bold subheads if you are designing a book to be read front to back.

I suppose, if you are using extra space above & below the subhead, you could also set it in bold, surrounded by a pair of printers’ fists, and a marginal note saying “here it is, stupid!”

But there really is no need.

ChrisL

I design almost exclusively books and I almost never use Bold Italic. That is, in a serif font. For sans, yes, sometimes.

(sorry Chris but I had to put my 2 cents in).

I find the Stone families just a little tired but Cycles looks nice and I am considering purchasing it at this rock bottom price just to have another serif family to consider.

Patty, I was not referring to further comments by anyone, I was merely addressing MondoB in hopes that he would not continually bring up his pet peeve of bold italic in every thread on Typophile wether it relates or not.

ChrisL

I’m sorry, didn’t you know? There is no rest for the wicked . . .

Small captions in reverse could be more confidently handled in a semi-bold or medium weight. It kind of all depends on how bold the bold is. As it has been said, we all can fail at imagining the valid usage situations that come up.

Mikey, the information for My Fonts is here.

I don’t want to re-read this thread, but I wonder if there will be a discount given to anyone who licenses the PS versions when the OT versions are released?

Tiff> I know OpenType versions are on their way, that would be a really nice thing of Mr. Stone wouldn’t it?

BJhavey> Thanks for the info, 65% is pretty good. Is that typical of the big foundries? Mono, Lino, FontShop, etc? I’m just trying to get a better picture of the what the designer has to deal with.

Mikey :-)

“Is that typical of the big foundries? Mono, Lino, FontShop, etc? “

No, it is more on the order of between 20% and 35% but there are better deals that some designers make with distributers.

ChrisL

Chris> Yikes! that’s not very good.

Even though I never knew what designers typically made, if there was a font that I wanted, I always try to purchase directly so they can get the most money. Now I’ll be more vigilant than ever! You guys work really hard so you better get paid right.

Nevertheless, I am a consumerist and I always get my bottom dollar for the best quality. Summer Stone is one of finest designers alive and the fonts are well price too- I win!!! He wins too. He must be hand over fist right now— low price- high volume. You go!!!

I bought Stone Humanist not that long ago! I love it! Will buy more soon too!

If I was one of those washed up actors hosting a PBS telethon or something I would say: “Pick up the phone and call now!”

Mikey :-)

<<
Widespread availability of delicious cake.
>>

Jo’s ’effect’

:_)

>[lack of bold italic] is also a nice test of one’s skills to find alternate solutions

This is the crux of this discussion.