Rochester Institute of Technology RIT Scholar Works Theses Thesis/Dissertation Collections 5-1-1999 A Database of typeface classification systems Anthony Kllc Di Pietro Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses Recommended Citation Di Pietro, Anthony Kllc, "A Database of typeface classification systems" (1999). Thesis. Rochester Institute of Technology. Accessed from This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact [email protected]. School of Printing Management and Sciences Rochester Institute of Technology Rochester, New York Certificate ofApproval Master's Thesis This is to certify that the Masters Thesis of Anthony C. Kllc Di Pietro With a major in Graphic Arts Publishing has been approved by the Thesis Committee as satisfactory for the thesis requirement for the Master of Science degree at the convocation / J dJte Thesis Committee: Thesis Advisor GrJduJte ProgrJm CoordinJtor Director Copyright 1999 Anthony C. Kile Di Pietro A Database of Typeface Classification Systems by Anthony C. Kile Di Pietro May 1999 A thesis project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science in the School of Printing Management and Sciences in the College of Imaging Arts and Sciences of the Rochester Institute of Technology Thesis Advisor-Professor Archie Provan I, Anthony C. Kile Di Pietro, wish to be contacted for requests for reproduction of this thesis, either whole or in part. My permanent e-mail address is: [email protected] Acknowledgements The author would like to acknowledge the following people for their assistance throughout the research and development of this thesis. Professor Archie Provan of the School of Printing Management and Sciences. Professor Marie Freckleton of the School of Printing Management and Sciences. Professor David Pankow of the School of Printing Management and Sciences. Professor Frank Romano of the School of Printing Management and Sciences. The Di Pietro and Kile families, especially Kathleen Di Pietro, for her assistance in compiling data. Mary Jane Ireland at the Lanston Type Co. Ltd., for the inclusion of the Goudy Thirty and Kennerley type families. And most of all, my very dearest thanks to Kimberly Kllc-Di Pietro for her love, support, and patience during this long period of production, and for her assumption of many more duties than were her due during the two-year course of this thesis. iii Table of Contents Abstract V1 Endnotes for Abstract vn Chapter 1 Introduction a Endnotes for Chapter 1 3 Chapter 2 Background and Significance 4 Endnotes for Chapter 2 7 Chapter 3 Review of Literature 8 Endnotes for Chapter 3 11 Chapter 4 Hypothesis 12 Chapter 5 Methodology J3 Chapter 6 Results 16 Chapter 7 Summary and Conclusions 17 Bibliography 18 iv Appendices Appendix A: Typeface Classification Systems Used 21 Appendix B: Classification System Not Used 47 Illustrations Sample Screens from the Typology Database 52 Abstract Since the turn of this century, there have been numerous attempts to develop a succinct sys classification.1 tem of typeface While each of these systems has its pros and cons, there has not been a serious effort to bring them together for comparison, cross-reference and analysis. The purpose of this thesis project is to identify those classification systems which are in and use, to develop an illustrative database which maps the sub classes of type styles to each other. Additionally, the database allows the user to input identification specifics into a series of predetermined fields to compile a listing of typefaces, alternate names, characteristics, and grouping systems which meet specified criteria. A terminolo gy list to aid the user has been incorporated to aid in glyph and style identification. This database may be significant, to those in the field of digital type creation and marketing, as well as typographers and designers, as both an educational and reference tool. vi Endnotes for Abstract 1 . Gordon Atkins ARCA MSIA, The Classification of Printing Types (Oadby Leicester, England: Apple Barrel Press, 1975,) Introduction. vii Chapter 1 Introduction When the desktop publishing explosion hit in the late 1980's, there was a rush to define type "explosion" and typographic parameters at the digital front-end. As the spread, there appeared to be a need for a typeface classification standard for the new digital era. To enable font substitutions and document format integrity, classification systems had long been in place, and with the advent of technology almost anyone could afford, the standards of type were plummeting. Certainly in the early part of the 1980's the issue of font substitution was not pressing. However, as more and more people became involved in publishing, and more digital type was produced, problems began to arise. Copyright and naming issues aside (referring to that of copying fonts for distribu tion of any kind,) it seems that there is a clear need tor digital font substitution. Fortunately the International Standards Organization has already proposed a method for the grouping and substitution of typefaces at the machine level. The iso 9541 Annex-A is also a comprehensive type classification system, incorporating all historical styles of western interest, and has been adapted to include such writing scripts as Arabic, Greek and Han. One of the problems arising from the lack of a standard classification system occurs when two or more individuals are working with type and are each familiar with a different classification system. Up until now, there were no standards in place, or even proposed. Confusion can and will arise. Fonts will be incorrectly substituted, type families and stvles will be misused, and typography will continue to degrade in quality. In fact, the accepted standards of quality are, typographically speaking, lower than they were twenty-five years prior. Ifa reference system was developed to map the various classification systems to each other, those individuals could begin to reach a common understanding, much confusion could be avoided, and for the beginner, learning could be accelerated with a tool geared at improving the ability to discern and understand type and typography. The classification of type, more specifically the cross-referencing of classification systems and related typographi cal/historical information can be the foundation of this education and common understanding. It is a subject where there are areas of general agreement and others where there is still controversy. Systems have been devised and proposed by individuals over a period century.1 beginning at the start of this Endnotes for Chapter 1 1. Gordon Atkins ARCA MSIA, The Classification of Printing Types (Oadby Leicester, England: Apple Barrel Press, 1975,) Introduction. Chapter 2 Background and Significance this Classification systems, as previously stated, have been in regular use since the turn of century. They were chiefly used by those working with type, (typographers, designers, etc.,) Alexander and also by type enthusiasts and print historians. For some, as in the case of systematic approach (to Lawson, a classification system which addressed "the need for a classification)"1 type seemed to be a logical enough reason to create his own. Lawson method . need exists for a rational makes a point in his textbook Printing Types that ". the art direc by which everyone concerned students, bibliographer, compositors, printers, letterforms."2 tors, and engineers can quickly work with the multiple styles of I. B. Liebermann on the other hand, attempted to classify "every conceivable face with and . two . system divisions with the inevitable result [of] a very complex primary styles."1 nine main categories, further subdivided into thirty classes and a hundred or more Walter Tracy, in an article from the Visible Language in the Winter of 1971 addressed the need for classification to the novice: The need for a classification is as obvious in printing as it is in botany which to be taught some people and learnt or any other subject has by by others, "materials" and where the of the subject are diverse in style and numerous in quan tity. From the beginning of the nineteenth century the range of type designs devel oped to such an extent that the type-founders and the writers of trade manuals found it necessary to identify specific groups of designs and apply names to those groups. Until recently, in the English-speaking world, the principal groups of text types were called: Old Face (Old Style in America,) Transitional, Modern and Old Style (Modernized Old Style in America.) Venetian was sometimes used to describe faces based on the Jenson type. The main groups of display types were named Script, Sans-serif, and Egyptian or Antique, with Blackletter (under various aliases) in occasional use.4 It is not a stretch of the imagination to see how a seamless digital font substitution system would solve font conflicts. many However, without a guide to how or why such a system works, typographers, graphic designers, pre-press houses and printers would have no of easy way preparing for the substitution system. They can now be better prepared with the Typology Database. The iso 9541 Annex-A is still in the process of implementation and will be in effect upon ratification of iso 9541 parts 1-7. In fact, there are over seven other classification sys tems which are in use, some more than others. (This causes much disagreement over what "style" of type one is referring to.) there had not a Previously, been serious effort to bring these classification systems under one root, so that a user might examine all the classification systems at once. there was not an interface which Additionally, had the flexibility to define specific charac teristics of a typeface which would allow a user access to a database of matching criteria for comparison and analysis.