For this one, I started by searching MyFonts for the keywords "futuristic" and "scifi," since that's how a font like this would be classified. I even checked the free-font archive, DaFont, to no avail. Finally, I did a little tweaking on the file so that I got the letters black on a white background, and put it through MyFonts' WhatTheFont, which yielded the answer. Once I saw what the font was, I understood why I couldn't find it with the proper keywords -- FF fonts typically don't have any, probably because they're relatively new to MyFonts, and there are a ton of them. Probably also because they're spending too much time on things like Olympukes, but we won't go into that here.

I can't speak for anybody else - after 20 years in this biz I just know a lot of fonts. If I don't recognize a font at all I don't even try - leave it to the experts. No algorhythms. But if I recognize and can't immediately ID a font I'll turn to my font collection or a book, or perhaps a site where I might have seen it. It's like trying to remember the name of a band or a movie title - it bugs me if I can't figure it out.

This site is one way I take a break from work, when I'm too lazy to actually get up from my computer.

I guess the more general answer to your question is that I know a good number of fonts on sight, but for the thousands of others I rely on my sleuthing techniques. I love looking things up. Basically I have a number of places to try, but I typically start with MyFonts or DaFont (if it looks like it's going to turn out to be a free font). I used to always start with WhatTheFont, but haven't lately, for some reason. Then I move on to one of the likely other foundries whose catalogs aren't on MyFonts. If I can't get it in any of those ways, I usually let it go after that.

Letting go is key. If I can't find the font in a few minutes I usually drop it. Again, leave it to the experts and the sleuths. There are SO many foundries. Check out this thread, for example.

This may become the 'thread that wouldn't die', but I'd like to make a stab at answering your latest question about the quality of a free font design.

The first thing is the hardest. Know whether it is original or copied and re-named. If it's a rip-off you should shun it like the plague.

Then I would say you should see if it has design consitency. Are the letters the same height that should be? Are the strokes of the letters properly executed. Are the letterforms related in their shapes and the way stems intersect? Are the serifs appropriate-looking? Is the x-height consistent?

The last part is subjective and can over-ride the previous considerations at times: Do you like the way it looks when you use it in words? Are the letters spaced the way they should be? (Poorly designed fonts often don't have much letter-fitting or kerning done.) Is the lettering reflecting a strong style in a way that seems original, or is it just like 50 other fonts that use a similar gimmick, like square counters for a 'tech look' (blecchhh!).

Those are some of the thoughts that go through my mind looking at a free font for the first time and trying to decide whether it's worth downloading, even at that price. To me if it's garbage, and I won't use it, what difference does it make if it's free?

Free fonts also often contain limited character sets, which can be a drawback.

But it depends so much on what you're planning to use it for, i.e. text or display - most free fonts seem to be display. I think it's exceedingly rare to find a fully developed text font for free, with all the bells and whistles. It's different if you just need a few words.

Also consider how the font looks at various sizes. If it's well proportioned it should hold up at both small and large sizes. But again, depends on your usage.

Bembo is a good example - it provides custom small caps, old-style figs, ligatures, alternates, and many weights. Adobe Garamond is a more recent example.

Most of these characters only come into play when you're setting running text, like a book or a magazine, but they're good to know about.

Speaking of DaFont and free fonts

but was asking you about "free" text fonts.

========

That is why type designers are poor.


===========

Letter design isn't just a few lines.... connected together. A new letter must live with its predecessors. A letter design is about communication. A cultural act.

To scan, copy etc etc , free font- this is not type design! This is a road without an aim!!!

Alex,
As Patricia said, what you seek is quite rare.

First I'll mention Graham Meade, who states himself that his fonts aren't the very highest quality, but he clearly puts lots of time into them (and there are plenty of fonts one can find on MyFonts for sale that ail big time in the quality department). Check out Meade's huge Street family for an example. Most of the fonts in the family have 88 kerning pairs. These are pairs of characters coded within the font for custom spacing relative to each other. It's a time-consuming process and one way to check on quality. 88 is on the low end, but most free fonts have none. Character sets are full in the Street family.

Also see the incredible output of Roger White. Kerning pairs vary from about 300 to 900-plus. Character sets are complete. The Sudbury family would be a good one to check out.

Another incredible free offering is Igino Marini's Fell Types.

Oh, and of course there's Storm's Lido.

Note that some (all?) of these font families are free for noncommercial use only.

I didn't know Tiffany was cute and free

This has been an interesting thread. I appreciated Tiffany's referral to Gaultney's Gentium. It looks like a very nice typeface, and I have just downloaded it.

However, in reference to Mike F's recommendation of Roger White's fonts, I have to say that browsing the collection showed a lot of heavily 'inspired' fonts. Sudbury, for example looks remarkably similar to Les Usherwood's fonts, especially 'Lynton'. Yes I see some differences, but the character of the font is not original, in my judgement. Many other fonts on his site also seem like re-named re-interpretations (to give the benefit of the doubt) of other exisiting fonts.

For me to be impressed by free fonts, I would like to know that they are really original work.

Sudbury is Les Usherwood's Caxton.

So it is.

I notice you apparently edited out your following question about the ethicality of digitizing typefaces. Even though the question is gone, I have thought about this a lot, and since I raised the issue with my criticism, I would like to state my own personal position on it.

I think a digitization is ethical if the typeface design is no longer the property of the designer or the foundry that issed it (in other words, a revival of an old typeface). If an authorized digitization exists of a newer typeface, such as those of Usherwood's Caxton, then digitization under a new name is unethical, in my view.

So what about the common practice of imitation of a successful design with an 'interpretation' or 'adaptation', or whatever other euphemism you choose? You can say it happens all the time, even among well-known foundries, and has throughout the history of type. I still would call those instances unethical, but because of the ridiculous copyright/patent issues regarding typefaces, they would not apparently be illegal.

If two designers revive the same typeface under different names, I guess it's up to the user's decide which is better and how much to pay for them. Neither should be worth as much as an original work, in my opinion. Alternate characters, kerning, and the fidelity and quality of the letterform renderings would all be factors in deciding which I would consider to be the best.

Making a few alterations to someone else's design and calling it yours is also unethical. That seems obvious.

Combining elements of various other typefaces to create a 'new' typeface is a bit 'gray', but seems basically dishonest if it is represented as something new and not a hybrid of other designs. Nick Curtis tells you when he does this, and that I can respect.

Does that cover all the bases?

Well, Mike Y., when I discovered Mr. White's body of work some time ago, I knew that it would be questioned somewhere down the line. It's a reasonable thing to do under the circumstances

Mike ... i see you had some stuff on your mind,
but please stick around. You do too much good for the
forum. It's pretty late here, so I'll try not to ramble.
But the ID Forum really is a melting pot with a
hundred unique perspectives, perspectives shaped
by where a person stands and watches the type wheels spin.
Those who earn their living in and around the wheels are naturally
going to hold stronger opinions about
certain things. Maybe even hypocritical opinions.
Or elite opinions.

It's the nature of the beast.

But please, don't feel as if there are bridges burned.
Some times you gotta speak up to feel whole.
Certainly, that is something is to be respected.

bj

Thanks for being here Mike.

On a slight tangent - nobody's addressing the BEST way to get a font for free, which is to get your client to pay for it. In the not-too-distant past, people paid an arm and a leg for typesetting (got their money's worth in terms of quality). Now the client assumes typesetting is part of the designer's job, and included in the fee. If you think a particular font is really integral to your design, it doesn't hurt to ask the client to at least split the cost with you. I've gotten some of my favorite fonts that way.

Mike, I second (or third) the idea that we need and want you to stay a part of this forum. And you certainly did not offend me in any way with your reply. I know perhaps we have gotten a tad off the 'Type Identification Board' topic, but those issues are ones we all have to deal with and make our own judgments about.

The information about Roger White's fonts is interesting, but it does seem to leave some questions about the originals he was working from. As you say Caxton isn't as old as he stated, unless Usherwood arrived at Caxton in the same way Roger White did, by digitizing something older. In the 'Modern Encyclopedia of Typefaces' it says: "Design prepared originally for Typesettra Ltd in Toronto, a design studio owned by the late Leslie Usherwood (1932 - 1982). Rights in the typeface were assigned to Letraset in 1981."

I don't know how the typeface exists in England in metal form before that period, but maybe there is an explanation. I am also more intrigued to review the other White fonts and see how they match up with other typefaces historically. I know there was a Baskerville, and this can be a valid revival, but I prefer revivals to use the original name, so that we know what they are based on.

Anyway, once more, I echo Yves words "don't you go anywhere Mike".

I've done more looking at the Roger White collection and I have to say I have huge doubts that all of his fonts are what he described to you Mike. Maybe some of them are what he said, but I doubt that most of them are.

He even has the ever popular freeware script 'Black Chancery' (Newborough) in there! Not to mention ITC Weidemann (Curborough), Handel Gothic (Newtown & Tamworth Gothic), Helvetica (!!) (Milford, Swansea & Yoxall), ITC Benguiat Gothic (Gratwich), Palatino (Queens Park) and Vivaldi (Hanford Script).

Maybe these are new digitizations, as he describes, but they can't all be from 40 year old books, and they can't all be things whose names he doesn't know.

I didn't want to spend more time identifying others, but I am convinced very little of this collection has not been digitized before. Some of his italics were just obliqued Romans. I can't say I am impressed by what he has there, for the most part.

That doesn't take anything away from the other points you so forcefully expressed. I agree with much of it.

And again, I hope you realize that you are entitled to your opinions and we value your contributions here.

Thank you Dave.
Just out of curiosity: how do you do it? Do you (and the others who're answering these questions) actually have a good visual memory and you have seen a lot of fonts in your life and you remember it? Or is it more of a algoritm: serif/sans/decorative/ - grotesque/geometric/humanist - and so on? I guess is a combination of both, right?

Good insights, thx. Speaking of DaFont and free fonts, is there any way for me, a guy with no design/art training to know if a free fonts is well or badly design? Are there any 3 or 4 capital rules that a font must respect to be considered not neccesarly beautiful but well (enough) designed?

Mike - you said something about kerning and I immediately remembered how strange the font that VH1 (Europe) is using now looks. It's a sans serif light font whith the "ll" or "li" almost illisible.

Patricia - Is there a famous (like in 'of reference') example(s) of a free high quality text font with more then one weights and a decent character set? I don't search something specific, I would just like to see what you mean.

Patricia - "Bembo

The most complete, high quality and free typeface out there, that I'm aware of, is Gentium deisgned by Victor Gaultney.

wha?

QUOTE - Tiffany Wardle said :"The most complete, high quality and free typeface out there, that I'm aware of, is Gentium deisgned by Victor Gaultney."
"cute&freee" was about Gentium. Thx Tiffany.

---

quote:

I've made myself a pariah

FF Rosetta