New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Create an account
Typophile RSS | More Feeds
Agreed, what can you say?
I shall not copy withering stuff from other people.
Good one Jos, that got me laughing, very funny.
Me too ;-)
Bless you, Jos.
Despite glaring similarities, can one accuse Myriad of being just a copy of Frutiger? Is Times Roman only a copy of Plantin, Sabon of Garamond? Type design is evolutionary, there are very few true originals. One might even consider Myriad an improvement on Frutiger with its true italics (linotype came out with true italics after Myriad), many widths and weights.
It's very convenient to your contention that we are looking at type rendered *on-screen*. It's a contrived "test" which indicates side bearing settings and spacing in linear text fonts are part of letter / glyph design. If you render these three fonts of similar letter / glyph design at the small sizes shown here on-screen at the pitiful resolution of 100 dots per inch, all three fonts appear to have the same spacing.
This does not prove the designers of Myriad and Mentone copied their spacing / side bering settings from Frutiger. It shows that linear text fonts of similar design require very similar spacing to be readable on-screen at small sizes, and shows that all competent type designers come to the same inevitable, unavoidable conclusions.
In print these fonts will render rather differently. You present a very selective visual argument, in effect a loaded, unfair, self-fulfilling falsehood.
Let's see a comparison of Frutiger with two other linear text fonts. Then another comparison of two more other linear text fonts. Say --- Frutiger versus Helvetica versus Futura. What about Frutiger versus Museo? You might be alarmed at how close your own spacing values are to most other linear text fonts *on-screen at this deceptive size*.
j a m e s
Ah Univers my old friend.