Research Display 90 850 Pt

Display 90 Research 850 pt 2 Text 90 Neue Kramer 18 pt Grotesk

Uppercase ABCDEFGHIJKLM NOPQRSTUVWXYZ

Diacritics Uppercase ÁĂǍÂÄÀĀĄÅÃÆ ǼĆČÇĈĊĐĎĐÉĔĚ ÊËĖÈĒĘĞĜĢĠĦĤ ĺĬǏÎÏİÌĪĮĨĴĶĹĽĻĿŁŃ ŇŅŊÑÓŎǑÔÖÒ ŐŌØǾÕŒÞŔŘŖŚŠ ŞŜȘŦŤŢȚÚŬǓÛÜÙ ŰŪŲŮŨẂŴẄẀẊÝ ŶŸỲŹŽŻ

Lowercase abcdefghijklmno pqrsßtuvwxyz

Figures 00123456789 NKG Text 90 Uppercase Adierisis 380 pt Alternate 1 Historical Short 2 Background Intro

2 Short Historical Intro Background 3

I am your Father...

Designed in Frankfurt in the 1920s the well-known typeface »Futura« nowadays remains a classic. The self- proclaimed »typeface of our times« is still one of the most popular ones all over the world today. Heck, it even travelled to the moon. Commonly, the type designer Paul Renner is regarded as its creator. But thanks to one mysterious sketch that was found in the archive of Frankfurt based architect Ferdinand Kramer there are voices that question Renner's (sole) authorship. Some even credit the whole idea to Kramer and make him the secret but true father of »Futura«. In literature you often find pictures of this very sketch titled as »Kramer Grotesk« to which specu lations around the question »who inspired whom?« are tied. From today's point of view it is hard to judge which story is »true« in the end. As a young architect Ferdinand Kramer worked together with Ernst May to rebuild Frankfurt after WWI while Paul Renner was asked to design an »architectural typeface« to label the new buildings. So it can be said with relative certaincy that they knew each other, talked about their work and exchanged ideas.

1 Paul Renner 2 Ferdinand Kramer Historical Short 4 Background Intro

Often their approaches were similar and they both had in common a strong belief in modernity that led to a radical break with the past. Technical simplicity, the rejection of ornamental elements or handwriting and a modular and reproduceable way of designing characterized their philosophies. Kramer was very much into the idea of working in an integral way, every single part having the same origin. Thus, as an architect, he did not only plan buildings on a large scale. He also continued designing smaller details like furniture or even door-handles and lettering. The »micro archi tecture« so to say. The fact that he also experimented with type just keeps on nourishing the myth of 3 »Kramer Grotesk«. We were not the only ones being interested in the story and eager to disclose the secret — just shortly after we started our work Joep Pohlen published an interesting article on typophile.com which reads at follows.

3 Door-handles by Ferdinand Kramer 4 Main entrance at Frankfurt University Short Historical Intro Background 5

4 The Myth of Joep 6 Kramer Grotesk Pohlen

The Myth of Kramer-Grotesk

You often read a book and register Futura is even today one of the most the information as being true, espe- used typefaces. cially when it is less or more the same Of course the biography by Chris- you have read before about the topher Burke about Paul Renner subject. It gets a bit odd when you (Hyphen Press, 1998) was the first to find out that in different publications read. The second was an article by things are mixed up and each publi- Burke about the authorship of Futura cation seems to add more and more in Baseline 23 (1997). In this article fuzz around the subject. I recently Burke widens the authorship to the bought a used book about Paul design staff of Bauer Type Foundry. Renner, published in 1978 by Philipp Not strange when you look at the Luidl for the Typographical Society in Munich, Germany. In that book the well-known typedesigner Günter Gerhard Lange wrote an article about Renner. Lange was at that time the art director of H. Berthold type foundry and was seen as one of the most influential people in the type design community in Germany. In his article he writes that the architect Ferdinand Kramer in 1925 made a drawing of a geometrical sans serif for the building department of the city of Frankfurt on which Renner based his Futura. On the next page in the same article Lange writes that Renner in 1924 began working on the design of Futura. This strange discrepancy in time was the reason that I wanted to know more about the widely known Kramer-Grotesk. I began reading books about Renner and Kramer to straigthen my mind about who really made the first design of Futura. Especially because

5 Joep The Myth of Pohlen Kramer Grotesk 7 complex technical production pro- But Kramer was in 1925 already a cess of a typeface in that period of well-known architect and product time but sadly it makes the discussion designer and he was working at the about the authorship not easier. But building department of the city of he also introduces some publications Frankfurt. He never attended the he also researched. One is an article Städel-Schule. Renner began with his (Tiessen, 1969) from the well-known first drawings for Futura in 1924 and at author Hans Peter Willberg. Willberg the beginning of 1925 first cuts of the writes that Kramer was a student at typeface were already done by Bauer the Städel-Schule in Frankfurt in 1925 Type Foundry. So both assertions of and that it was Kramer who made Willberg are wrong. at that school the first drawings that But the most used piece of evidence later became Futura. in several publications about Kramer- Grotesk is a sheet of paper that shows capitals of Futura with some of the characters only as outline sketches that are crossed out. Elsewhere on the sheet alternative characters are enclosed [picture 5]. So I had to figure out when this sheet of paper with sketches was first published and why it was attributed to Kramer. Since most of the material of Bauer Type Foundry is supposed to be destroyed during World War II I first had to research publications from before this war. One important publication is an article by Denis Megaw in Typography 7, published in 1938. On page 34 a couple of drawings are shown that are presented as the first designs of Futura by Renner (1924). These are the lower case characters and capitals that are placed on the top of the page [picture 6]. Below this two character sets a complete set is shown from Futura as published by Bauer in its final form (without The Myth of Joep 8 Kramer Grotesk Pohlen

5 Early sketch of »Futura« uppercase 6 Renner's first and final designs of »Futura«

6 Joep The Myth of Pohlen Kramer Grotesk 9 the extra alternative characters). But teach at Fritz Wicherts Frankfurt Art the set below was not published by School. At that time he also meets Bauer earlier than 1927 (the publi- Wicherts friend Ernst May who is the cation year according to Paul Renner head of the building department of in the Georg-Müller-Book article). the city of Frankfurt. The architect The sheet of paper with sketches Ferdinand Kramer was also working at [picture 5] show in black more or less this department and met Paul Ren- the definitive forms of the capitals ner around that time. Together with of Futura while the outline forms are Ernst May Renner and Kramer be showing his first designs from 1924 came part of the group that worked for the A and K. There is also an invi on the ambitious plans for rebuilding tation card for a lecture dated 3. July parts of the city of Frankfurt. A lot of (1925) made with trial cuts of Futura inspiration for the plans came from by Bauer [picture 10]. These charac- the Bauhaus and buildings of the Stijl ters and mainly the capitals are in in Holland. One of the examples that a state between the first designs in was also published in the magazine the article from Megaw and the final Das Neue Frankfurt was De Unie in ones beneath that. Look for example Rotterdam by Architect Oud. On that at the M, N and R. The same story is building typography is clearly part told by a trial setting that was made of the architecture. One of the first for the publication Schrift by F.H. things May asked from Renner was to Ehmke that was published on July deliver an architectural typeface that 9th 1925. You have to keep in mind could be used in architecture and for that at that time the publication signing on shops and small structures of a book would have taken several like bus stops. I think that the sheet months from concept to producing, that was delivered by Renner to the gathering illustrations, setting, building department is also the sheet proofing and printing. As described that can be found in the Werkkata- by Paul Renner in the interview 'From log Ferdinand Kramer 1923-1974 by Georg-Müller book to Futura and the Jochem Jourdan that was published in Meisterschule; recollections by Paul the 'Schriftenreihe 3 der Architekten Renner' (translated) he mentioned kammer Hessen' in 1974. In this even that he showed trials of Futura Werkkatalog the design sheet of by Bauer already in february 1925 letterforms is dated 1925 according during lectures at large printing firms to Jourdan. I think that on this sheet in Cologne and Mönchengladbach. the myth of the Kramer-Grotesk In May 1925 (around Easter) Renner is based and not on the sheet that moves from München to Frankfurt to was published later in Baseline (The The Myth of Joep 10 Kramer Grotesk Pohlen Joep The Myth of Pohlen Kramer Grotesk 11

7 Sketch of »Kramer-Grotesk« 8 Fassade of Kramer's parents' shop 9 Page from the Bauhaus-Archive publication 10 Invitation card set in »Futura«

7 The Myth of Joep 12 Kramer Grotesk Pohlen authorship of Futura by Chistopher of this set of capitals. A publication Burke) and several other publications in Das Neue Frankfurt in january 1927 [picture 7]. This second sheet with shows the typography of the fassade drawings of capital Futura letters was of the hat shop of Ferdinand Kramers credited to Kramer simply because it parents in Frankfurt using the capitals was found in his archive. Of course it of Futura [picture 8]. This design as could also be there because he had well as the design of a second shop taken it from his work at the building fassade on the same page is credited department. It could be a copy or to Renner as well as that the name of even the original that Renner had the typeface (Futura) is also men- delivered at the building department tioned in the caption of the other for copying and distributing to letter picture. Some slight alternations to sign firms and architects that worked the characters can also be caused by in Frankfurt. There are some slight sign makers who had to take over the differences between the characters letterforms from the drawings of Ren- (for example the J and S) of the trial ner. At that time there were no com- settings of Bauer Type Foundry and puters, scanners or even laser equip- the capitals on the Kramer-sheet but ment that could do that. That is also that could be a design decision by the reason why the model drawings Renner for the architectural purpose from Renner were made on so-called

8 Joep The Myth of Pohlen Kramer Grotesk 13

9 The Myth of Joep 14 Kramer Grotesk Pohlen mm-paper with lines that could easily find no other reason why Kramer did be translated to enlargements of the not reject the publication of the so- letterforms. called Kramer Grotesk and his role in I think that looking at the timeline of the design of Futura like stated in the the publications and the consistence caption on page 33 in the Bauhaus- of the development of the design Archiv publication [picture 9]. of Futura by Renner there can be no One of the publications that helped doubt that Kramer-Grotesk is a myth. me a lot in this research was the thesis The only thing that remains and is of Charles C. Leonard 'Paul Renner hard to understand is why Ferdinand and Futura: The Effects of Culture, Kramer did not protest against this and Social Continuity on the Design so-called Kramer-Grotesk that was of Type for Printing' that he published published in several works like the in 2005/2006. Leonard thoroughly Bauhaus-Archiv publication Ferdi researched the drawings shown in nand Kramer Architektur & Design in Typography 7 as well as the disputed 1982 when he was alive and kicking design sheet from 'Wie eine Buch- (although he was at that time 84 years druckschrift entsteht' (How a new old). Kramer was an architect who printing type is made) of Bauer Type had a very good reputation in furni- Foundry in 1958. One thing that he ture design and architecture and one presumes falsely is that the design could say that he did not need this sheet from 1958 was a reprint of the credit for Kramer-Grotesk. The capi- publication of Bauer with the same tals of Futura were developped in the name from 1931. This publication was definitive form in 1925 but the lower completely different from the one case characters still had to go a long in 1958. Bauer Type Foundry used way to meet the final design. Maybe this first publication to promote the the development of this lower case typeface Beton from Heinrich Jost letters were part of the discussions that was new at that time. All the Renner had with Kramer and it could illustrations but also the text were be that the huge transformations of based on this typeface. In 1958 the these designs strengthened Kramers text and illustrations had as sub- idea that he actually had been part ject Futura that was a longrunner in of the birth of Futura. According to sales at Bauer. So the design sheet Neumann in his article in Ferdinand of Futura that was published in the Kramer from 1991 Kramer did say 1958 publication was first published (gesprächsweise) that he considered in 1958 and never before as far as I himself as one of the 'fathers' of know. So I think that this sheet was Futura. This is all speculation but I can never near Kramer as presumed by Joep The Myth of Pohlen Kramer Grotesk 15

Christopher Burke in the caption of Despite the findings this story leaves Baseline and has always been in the an odd taste in my mouth about the archive of Bauer Type Foundry being role of Ferdinand Kramer. It is hard one of the first designs of Renner that to believe that a respected architect he delivered to them. In the caption and designer like him would claim of the 1958 publication of Bauer the something he has not made. But may- design is dated 1925 but because be others can look into that and could Renner showed first cuttings during find an explanation for that. lectures in february 1925 (see above) and Burke also writes that first trial cuts by Bauer were done in the winter of 1924/25 I think that this has to be an earlier design and maybe has to be dated to 1924 because the setting trials as published in July 1925 in found at: http://www.typophile.com/node/125922 Ehmckes Schrift had already a similar (25th april 2017) design of the capitals on this sheet. 10 Uppercase R NKG Text 90 16 Alternate 380 pt Design Typeface »Neue Concept Kramer Grotesk« 17

Redesigning the Typeface that never existed

While working on »Neue Kramer Grotesk« it was very important for us to root our design rather in concep tual aspects than in the formal con ventions of the time of Kramer and his colleague Renner. We didn't want to bring up old fashions again. Nor did we ask ourselves »How would Kramer have designed the letters?«. Our goal was to create something contemporary that speaks for itself but still has its roots in Frankfurt design history. Therefore, through its existence it continues, questions and (re-)interprets certain principles from that period of time. The mysterious sketch of so-called »Kramer Grotesk« was the starting point. We kept certain details like the pointy joins or the slightly odd character of the original uppercase alphabet while at the same time modernizing the rhythm and im proving the readability. In contrast to »Futura« the text version e.g. offers a two-story »a« and a three-story »g«. The whole family is planned as a »purpose specific« designed multiple master typeface: It consists of two different styles — »Text« (optimized for smaller sizes) and »Display« (for poster and headline use) — both exis- ting in five different weights. Slanted cuts will be added soon. Typeface »Neue Design 18 Kramer Grotesk« Concept

As Ferdinand Kramer completely rejected everything ornamental and Paul Renner declared handwriting (and every glyph form that comes from handwritten type) as outdated they looked for new ways of designing and constructing. Renner explained that the »typeface of our times« has to reflect the contemporary tools and methods of production. During that decades the most modern technique was hot metal typesetting, which allowed a completely new, geometric and static way of designing letters. For Renner it was therefore the logical consequence that printed type lost every hint of dynamics. This gets even more obvious regarding his alternative glyph designs that are completely geometrically construc- ted experiments. Consequently, we asked ourselves for the tools, materials and methods of our time. How does the design process nowadays differ from the workflow nearly 100 years ago? Computers and digitality offer new means such as OpenType, respon- sive typography and animation. The design is still reminiscent of archi tectonic principles, but fluidity and digital »immateriality« bring back a new kind of dynamics and motion to our typeface. This character is different from the dynamics found in handwriting; it offers the possibility to follow a certain way of movements within the given statics. Design Typeface »Neue Concept Kramer Grotesk« 19

Similar to »Futura«, »Neue Kramer Grotesk Display« also owns a range of stylistic sets, but these new alternative glyphs in contrast do not simply play with geometric con struction in general. Instead they follow strict rules that transform and morph the letters' »natural skeleton«. Yet we don't rearrange it completely and give it an artificial anatomy like »Futura« partly did. We set the the glyph architecture in motion — the alternatives seem like a sequence of stills from an animation. Changing proportions, rotating, lengthening or shortening stems, scaling, opening and closing circles. But curves remain curves and straights remain straights. The dynamic character is underlined by an integrated »Random«-function that automatically exchanges the glyphs while typing on the computer.

Early experimental glyphs of »Futura« Alternative NKG Display 90 20 Glyphs 18 pt

Alternatives Uppercase AAAAAAAABBBBBBCCCCCCCCC CDDDDEEEEEEFFFFFFGGGGGG GGGGHHHHIIIJJJJJJJJJJKKKK KLLLLMMMMMMMMNNNNOOOO OOPPPPPPQQQQQRRRRRRSSS SSSSTTTTUUVVVVVWWWXXXXY YZZZZZ

Alternatives Lowercase abbccccccccccddeeeeeeeeeee ffffffffffgggggggghhiiiijjjjjjj jjjkkkkmmmmmmnnooppqqrrrr rrrrrsssssssttttttttuuvvvvww wwxxxxyyzzzzz

Ligatures ff fi gg mm oo ww

Punctuation Alternates !!¡¡???¿¿¿&&&&&&&&(( ( ( ()) ) ) ) \\\/// Credits Text 90 9 pt

Extent

2 styles (»Text« & »Display«) 5 weights 405 + 782 glyphs »Slanted Text« coming soon

Language Support

Albanian, Danish, Dutch, English, Faroese, Fin- nish, Flemish, German, Icelandic, Indonesian, Irish, Italian, Malay, Norwegian, Portuguese, Scottish Gaelic, Spanish, Swahili, Swedish, Tagalog, Afrikaans, Basque, Breton, Bosnian, Catalan, Croatian, Czech, Esperanto, Estonian, Fijian, French, Frisian, Greenlandic, Hawaiian, Hungarian, Latin, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Maori, Polish, Provençal, Rhaeto-Romanic, Romanian, Moldavian, Romany, Sámi (Inari), Sámi (Luli), Sámi (Northern), Sámi (Southern), Samoan, Slovak, Slovenian, Sorbian, Turkish, Welsh

Contact [email protected] Don‘t hesitate to be in touch. Licenses on request. Research Display 90 2 850 pt