Why doesn't Swift have a Bold Italic?

Primary tabs

15 posts / 0 new
Last post
Hashim Padiyath Mohemmadali's picture
Joined: 5 Dec 2004 - 10:19pm
Why doesn't Swift have a Bold Italic?
0

[[Gerard Unger]]'s [[Swift]] is a trend setting typeface, marred only by its lack of a [[Bold Italic]], like many other of Unger's type designs. Why did he choose not to design Bold Italics? Any ideas?

Peter Bruhn's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Sep 2001 - 11:00am
0

Hello Hashim, there’s a bold italic here:

http://www.gerardunger.com/fontstore/store-swift.html

Stefan Hattenbach's picture
Joined: 7 Sep 2004 - 1:22pm
0

And as a type designer it’s hell to make the bold itallic weight. Not only do you have to make adjustments from regular, but also count for all the changes of details and angels as well.
I wonder if the old masters felt the same (apart from the general opinion that body copy didn’t needed a bold italic)?

Cheers/SH

Yves Peters's picture
Offline
Joined: 7 Nov 2002 - 11:00am
0

As far as I can remember Gerard was quite unhappy with
Swift 1.0 — why is it being rereleased by Linotype while the
superior 2.0 is available from Unger himself?

Yves Peters's picture
Offline
Joined: 7 Nov 2002 - 11:00am
0

The people from The Foundry are also being divas when it
comes to italic weights. Only Foundry Monoline has them
for other weights than Regular or Book. :-)

Dan Reynolds's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 - 11:00am
0

Yves, we are converting our Hell Typefaces archive to OpenType. Most of those typefaces were designed by Hermann Zapf and Gerard Unger. Swift is just part of the general archive, whose fonts will now finally be available in OpenType. Unger’s selling of Swift 2.0 is a separate enterprise.

On another note, there are several versions of many typeface families within the Linotype Library. Helvetica has Helvetica, Helvetica Neue, and Helvetica Linotype (OpenType fonts optimized for Office use). Palatino also has the old digital version, the Palatino Linotype done for Microsoft, and soon the new Palatino nova. When new releases of old fonts are brought into the library, the old ones normally stay in, too. There are still good typefaces, too.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

From what I’ve heard the difference between Swift 1 & 2 is not huge. But if you can afford to help out the designer directly, that’s always good — and you will get something better.

hhp

Tiffany Wardle's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Jul 2001 - 11:00am
0

Sounds like you need to license Swift 2.0 … the first version did not have a bold italic.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Some designers don’t make a Bold-Italic as a form of functional romanticism, or you could call it capricious (or rebellious) anachronism.

hhp

Tiffany Wardle's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Jul 2001 - 11:00am
0

I don’t know about Swift 1.0 or its history, but don’t you think that in some cases the client simply didn’t want/need a bold italic and so it wasn’t in the budget?

Dan Reynolds's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 - 11:00am
0

An OpenType version of Swift 1.0, as well as several other typefaces from the Dr.-Ing Rudolf Hell archive, will be available in OpenType format shortly. I just rekeyed Swift into the database a few weeks ago; can’t remember if the OpenType version had a bold italic though. I’ll check tomorrow.

Dan Reynolds's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 - 11:00am
0

The OpenType version of Swift (1.0) which will appear on Linotype’s site imminently will have a bold italic weight.

Giampa the Great's picture
Joined: 7 Dec 2004 - 5:52pm
0

Bold is typefounders buff. Usually, anyway!

Dan Reynolds's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 - 11:00am
0

?

Giampa the Great's picture
Joined: 7 Dec 2004 - 5:52pm
0

Bold is type on junk food. Usuaully, anyway!