Maison Typeface

TM—O's picture

hej all,
i’ve just finished maison, a sans serif, that is based on a monospaced design, but comes in proportional version too and it would like to know what you think.

you can download a sample pdf here
or have a look at this project on my portfolio site.

thanks,
T

nithrandur's picture

Hi Timo.

Somehow, the lowercase a seems much too off. I think you should remove the overshoots for the tail of the lowercase a, and see if it gets better. Also, as the typeface gets bolder, the details become much more obscure (especially for the lowercase n). These bold types are usually set in large sizes, so detail is important, but it's up to you if you made it really that way.

Good luck, and keep it up.

Cheers,
Josef

Quincunx's picture

Yes, you have to open up the bold weights. The spots where strokes join the stems (a, d, n, etc.) have filled up because of the boldening.

Acutually, I would open up those spots in all the weights.

TM—O's picture

thanks for your feedback!
yes, i am aware of the fakt... those are actually opticly corrected and opend (very slightly) but i’ve tried to do as less as it seemed possible to me. i wanted to keep the one stroke and simple/bold felling to the characters..

TM—O's picture

thanks for your feedback!
yes, i am aware of that fakt... those are actually opticly corrected and opend (very slightly) but i’ve tried to do as less as it seemed possible to me. i wanted to keep the one stroke and simple/bold felling to the characters..

Quincunx's picture

I understand, but it doesn't look quite right. :)

TM—O's picture

hehe.. maybe it’s just what you’re are used to look at..
i wanted to do the opposite of this:

Stephen Coles's picture

Has potential. Very Lineto. I get your attempt to add weight mechanically, but the heaviest weight really is distracting, like Jelmar said. I think you can still adjust those joins a bit without getting goofy.

TM—O's picture

here is an update.
i actually realized that i’ve posted an older version..
now you see the slight differenz! need more opening?
thanks to all anyhow!
and hope more comments to come! :)
best, timo

Quincunx's picture

Personally I think, yes, it still needs some more opening. I think those joins will look like little black blobs at text sizes. But it's your call. :)

fonthausen's picture

I am aware you want that one stroke look, but optically a horizontal stroke looks thicker than a vertical one, when using the mathematically same thickness.

Maybe it might help if you make the horizontals less thick overall. This would solve a lot.

// Jacques

James Arboghast's picture

Hi Timo, surprizing nobody has mentioned Emigre or Jonathan Barnbrook's Mason font yet. "Maison" is so close to "Mason", only one letter the difference, Emigre as publisher of Mason could very easily assemble a claim for trademark infringement by way of dilution of their trademark.

j a m e s

beejay's picture

just to be clear...Emigre has not filed any font names as trademarks, though they* assert trademark rights. They could always send a nice C&D letter, but cannot file a federal suit without having filed an actual trademark.

also, dilution as a legal term involves famous marks and would have no basis here.

finally, a reasonable person would ask: Is Maison going to create a likelihood of confusion among font buyers? (one element of trademark infringement).

People might not know that maison is the French word for house. So yes, it might create confusion if people read it the same way they read Mason.

Can two exact font names peacefully coexist? Yes. Farao is one an example.

So maybe out of respect for Emigre and Barnbrook—and not necessarily for fear of legal reprisal—it might be wise to find another name?

Or email Rudy or Zuzana and ask them. Again, out of respect and wanting to do right.

communication never hurts. :)

* they (technically, emigre = it)

eliason's picture

The dots on the i's are way too big to my eye.

James Arboghast's picture

@BJ: just to be clear...Emigre has not filed any font names as trademarks, though they* assert trademark rights. They could always send a nice C&D letter, but cannot file a federal suit without having filed an actual trademark.

Emigre does not have to register any of their trademarks in order to claim use of them as trademarks. I never said "registered trademark", or anything about Emigre starting litigation proceedings. "Infringement" of a trademark needs no formal enshrinement to bolster a claim.

also, dilution as a legal term involves famous marks and would have no basis here.

Wanna put money on that? I'm not a lawyer but I have worked for a firm of entertainment lawyers who say you're wrong about that.

So maybe out of respect for Emigre and Barnbrook—and not necessarily for fear of legal reprisal—it might be wise to find another name?

Or email Rudy or Zuzana and ask them. Again, out of respect and wanting to do right

This is the best way of dealing with it if Timo is reluctant to change the name of Maison. Ask them first. I didn't bring this up with the idea of Emigre wanting to take legal action, only that they may have objections and so it would be prudent to either change the name of Maison to something else or consult Emigre about it.

j a m e s

beejay's picture

we'll leave the first one alone because assemble a claim can mean anything. I took it to mean, get litigious with an actual legal filing, whereas you probably meant, send a letter.

I know infringement can occur without a registered trademark, but was pointing out that Timo will not face a lawsuit until a mark is filed (and a mark can be expedited for a fee) :)

the second one, it's probably semantics again.

dilution is a nebulous term that can mean whatever we want it to mean.

legally:

The Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 is a United States federal law which protects famous trademarks from uses that dilute their distinctiveness, even in the absence of any likelihood of confusion or competition. It went into effect on January 16, 1996. This act has been largely supplanted by the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 (TDRA), signed into law on October 6, 2006.

also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark_dilution

but there are state statutes that don't require a mark to be famous to be diluted. But those state statutes are really not germane here, i don't think.

Most IP attorneys in the United States—and this is where I'd be willing to bet!—associate the word dilution with famous marks.

I didn't want timo to think he was in some kind of predicament... and I wanted to point him toward a possible solution. Which is why i posted.

beyond that:

I'm sure if we were both sitting in the same room having a chat, and not guessing at intent, we'd be on the same page. :D

and looks like we both support the same conclusion.

cheers

1985's picture

I don't think the name is an issue, it's a different word, with a different meaning. The two words also sound is very different, one being English, one being French.

1985's picture

(Note, this is not a legally informed opinion. Also, good work on that typeface Timo!)

Syndicate content Syndicate content