Monotype launches the first redesign of Helvetica in 35 years(creativeboom.com)
creativeboom.com
Monotype launches the first redesign of Helvetica in 35 years
https://www.creativeboom.com/resources/monotype-launches-the-first-redesign-in-35-years-of-the-worlds-most-ubiquitous-font-helvetica/
101 comments
+1 for Univers!
Honestly, it's right there in the names. Helvetica projects a very Swiss Modern feel to it. Sometimes that's what you want, sometimes it's not. Univers is the most neutral typeface around that's got any personality at all. (I've always felt Haas Unica and many of the modern sans faces, especially the "brand" ones, have so little character to them that they're just completely bland and uninteresting.) Univers just... is. It's Frutiger's best design, and that's saying something.
Other favorites of mine include Trade Gothic (& friends) and Futura. I'm a huge fan of the 1930s-1970s "industrial" look, like you might find stamped on motor nameplates for heavy machinery, or the Apollo cockpits, or the IBM 360 consoles. These designs just scream _solid_ in a way that modern stuff... doesn't. (Maybe because it isn't.)
(Tangent to a tangent: does anyone know what typeface HP used on their equipment in the '70s through '90s? It's a very close cousin to Univers, but not identical. Maybe something internal only? I don't think it's just an odd cut of any of the usual suspects either. This is another typeface that has always connoted reliability and stuff that Just Works to me.)
Still, though, like you, I'd say Univers is my favorite more days than not. If I had to pick only one typeface, it'd be the one (more days than not)... just don't make me do that :)
Honestly, it's right there in the names. Helvetica projects a very Swiss Modern feel to it. Sometimes that's what you want, sometimes it's not. Univers is the most neutral typeface around that's got any personality at all. (I've always felt Haas Unica and many of the modern sans faces, especially the "brand" ones, have so little character to them that they're just completely bland and uninteresting.) Univers just... is. It's Frutiger's best design, and that's saying something.
Other favorites of mine include Trade Gothic (& friends) and Futura. I'm a huge fan of the 1930s-1970s "industrial" look, like you might find stamped on motor nameplates for heavy machinery, or the Apollo cockpits, or the IBM 360 consoles. These designs just scream _solid_ in a way that modern stuff... doesn't. (Maybe because it isn't.)
(Tangent to a tangent: does anyone know what typeface HP used on their equipment in the '70s through '90s? It's a very close cousin to Univers, but not identical. Maybe something internal only? I don't think it's just an odd cut of any of the usual suspects either. This is another typeface that has always connoted reliability and stuff that Just Works to me.)
Still, though, like you, I'd say Univers is my favorite more days than not. If I had to pick only one typeface, it'd be the one (more days than not)... just don't make me do that :)
NASA listed its preferred typefaces for workstation panels in Section 9.5.3.1.14.1 of NASA-STD-3000, the Man-System Integration Standards.[0] Engraved lettering, in order of preference, was set in Futura Demibold, Gorton Normal, or Gorton Condensed. They're also listed on page 113 of the Databook for Human Factors Engineers Volume I Human Engineering Data,[1] along with other very interesting design guidelines.
The Gorton typefaces were part of the MASTER COPY type templates[2][3] produced by George Gorton Machine Co. for its Pantograph engraving machines, and were commonly used for civilian and military aircraft panels produced from at least the late 40s onwards, possibly earlier (the linked catalog is from 1947). Since many of those contractors were heavily involved in Mercury and later Apollo, it makes sense that they used the same engraving machines and type. IBM also used Gorton when it started producing double shot keycaps for its keyboards in the 70s. There's also a modified version, Gorton Modified, that was created by Signature Plastics for keycaps that's still used today for SA profile caps.
Unfortunately, the Gorton plotter fonts have never been revived for digital use despite their interesting history.
0. https://msis.jsc.nasa.gov/sections/section09.htm#_9.5_LABELI...
1. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/197100...
2. http://luc.devroye.org/fonts-80708.html
3. http://gorton-machine.org/forms/form_1309d/index.html
The Gorton typefaces were part of the MASTER COPY type templates[2][3] produced by George Gorton Machine Co. for its Pantograph engraving machines, and were commonly used for civilian and military aircraft panels produced from at least the late 40s onwards, possibly earlier (the linked catalog is from 1947). Since many of those contractors were heavily involved in Mercury and later Apollo, it makes sense that they used the same engraving machines and type. IBM also used Gorton when it started producing double shot keycaps for its keyboards in the 70s. There's also a modified version, Gorton Modified, that was created by Signature Plastics for keycaps that's still used today for SA profile caps.
Unfortunately, the Gorton plotter fonts have never been revived for digital use despite their interesting history.
0. https://msis.jsc.nasa.gov/sections/section09.htm#_9.5_LABELI...
1. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/197100...
2. http://luc.devroye.org/fonts-80708.html
3. http://gorton-machine.org/forms/form_1309d/index.html
Univers makes me think of something like 2001: A Space Odyssey where computers are just running everything and they've long since figured out how to do it efficiently.
That's mostly Microgramma, although its successor Eurostile has become a default for spaceship signage.
Microgramma really hits the spot for a certain kind of 60s/70s retro-futurism.
Microgramma really hits the spot for a certain kind of 60s/70s retro-futurism.
If you like those fonts and have a Win10 installation somewhere, look for Bahnschrift. New variable type font that looks like DIN that’s included since some Windows 10 version.
You might want to reference a picture of the HP font and post it on What the Font [1]
[1] https://www.myfonts.com/WhatTheFont/
[1] https://www.myfonts.com/WhatTheFont/
I do have a copy of that HP font, it is very beautiful but cannot be used in anything as it 'screams HP' I have no idea though it I can share it without getting in trouble, no idea of the licencing status of that font.
Could you please email it to me? I'd love to check it out.
I find Univers much more stately than Helvetica. I think neither are very good for screen or small text, and obviously they weren’t designed for screen at the time, but you still see people specifying Helvetica variants on their webpages. Univers is very nice, but for anyone making any hobby website, maybe set it to system-ui,sans-serif or use Inter, or something modern with personality like Fira.
I have to say, the movie poster example does it no favors. But, then again, it seems to be most movie poster designer's prerogative to turn credits into vertical lines.
I'm partial to Futura and Gill Sans when it comes to sans-serif fonts. For display stuff, that is. Akzidenz-Grotesk is a pretty good text sans-serif.
I'm partial to Futura and Gill Sans when it comes to sans-serif fonts. For display stuff, that is. Akzidenz-Grotesk is a pretty good text sans-serif.
The movie poster example just shows its versatility. Univers typeface consists of some 50+ fonts and it’s application varies widely.
Akzidenz Grotesk is one of my favorites right up there along with suisse intl.
This has nothing to do with it, but for hardware interfaces I grew to love DIN Next, which is inspired by the classic German Industry font DIN 1451 Engschrift and DIN1451 Mittelschrift
Font link: https://www.myfonts.com/fonts/linotype/din-next.
Very nice indeed, very “German”. I can see how an engineer would find this font lovely.
Very nice indeed, very “German”. I can see how an engineer would find this font lovely.
I've worked on several embedded GUIs that used the DIN font and noticed how nice it looks.
You did mention its usage on pre-2003 Apple keyboards (Univers 57 Condensed Oblique), but I'm so nostalgic for that usage in particular that I wanted to share a photo for those who aren't familiar: https://i.imgur.com/eiSx7nn.jpg
Big fan of Univers. The best thing about it for me is the sophistication of the letter spacing - Helvetica is just sort of banged together, and of course in modern usage is often set 'tight but not touching' for design reasons, but the spacing in Univers is so carefully done that the text has a lovely rhythm on the page. Frutiger was a genius.
What are some free alternatives to Univers and Helvetica?
Open Sans is a poor replacement. I quite like Source Sans Pro but it isn't the same as Helvetica
Open Sans is a poor replacement. I quite like Source Sans Pro but it isn't the same as Helvetica
Google's Roboto is a very close drop-in replacement for Helvetica. Almost the same metrics, slightly more "condensed"/DIN feel.
You may also consider FreeSans (GNU replacement for Helvetica) and Liberation Sans (which is a metric replacement for Arial, which is an alternative for Helvetica...)
Also, what's wrong with Open Sans?
You may also consider FreeSans (GNU replacement for Helvetica) and Liberation Sans (which is a metric replacement for Arial, which is an alternative for Helvetica...)
Also, what's wrong with Open Sans?
Roboto to me feels very 'edgy' and active, and less neutral than Helvetica.
Most Linux systems come with the Nimbus fonts as part of the printer drivers, and Nimbus Sans is very close, but apparently (AFAIK) only has a limited character set unless you pay for the full version. GNU FreeFont is practically the same as Helvetica and Nimbus but gives you a much larger character set for free.
Liberation is not quite as geometric as Helvetica/FreeFont/Nimbus.
Here's a comparison of a few fonts (the first is San Francisco by Apple).
https://i.imgur.com/SwxydqB.png
The 'r' and 't' in Liberation look quite a bit different than the first three, which are basically Helevetica clones. The ring in the 'b' also has a weird lower-left side. It's like 20% of the way to being a Serif font.
I haven't used MS fonts in a while but DejaVu reminds me very much of Arial, and to me it looks a lot worse. Especially the way the 'S' looks is quite awkward.
Most Linux systems come with the Nimbus fonts as part of the printer drivers, and Nimbus Sans is very close, but apparently (AFAIK) only has a limited character set unless you pay for the full version. GNU FreeFont is practically the same as Helvetica and Nimbus but gives you a much larger character set for free.
Liberation is not quite as geometric as Helvetica/FreeFont/Nimbus.
Here's a comparison of a few fonts (the first is San Francisco by Apple).
https://i.imgur.com/SwxydqB.png
The 'r' and 't' in Liberation look quite a bit different than the first three, which are basically Helevetica clones. The ring in the 'b' also has a weird lower-left side. It's like 20% of the way to being a Serif font.
I haven't used MS fonts in a while but DejaVu reminds me very much of Arial, and to me it looks a lot worse. Especially the way the 'S' looks is quite awkward.
I just don't like the spacing with DejaVu... it's awkward is about all I can say about it. I do like Roboto a lot myself, and it's generally my default these days.
Posted on HN only this week, Public Sans is interesting:
https://public-sans.digital.gov/
Not quite as grotesque as Helvetica too.
https://public-sans.digital.gov/
Not quite as grotesque as Helvetica too.
Tex Gyre Heros, Nimbus Sans, FreeSans, all Helvetica clones.
Roboto feels good too
I know it's a "design" website and all, but can't they just show an A-Z so I can look at it?
The official website has better representations, but is still full of a load of flashy animations and videos before you get to the actual font https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-now
The official website has better representations, but is still full of a load of flashy animations and videos before you get to the actual font https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-now
I was thinking the same thing and went through the whole article looking for a representation of the old font vs. the new font. It's my understanding that the only changes where kerning and slight shape changes but a picture of them side-by-side would be nice.
They are selling a brand, not kerning.
I did a little comparison between the bold weight of Helvetica, Helvetica Neue, and Helvetica Now, and the new typeface does look really, really nice. The letterforms aren't too noticeably different, but the kerning and relative positioning of the letters have been tweaked in such a way as to make the font appear more pleasing and readable (at least on my computer display). I'm also pleased this new font is available for use on websites via Fonts.com and in mockup work via SkyFonts. I'm definitely going to keep this in mind for future projects.
Interesting. The new design makes it seem like they're trying to get away from the political stigma of Helvetica, while also kind of poking fun at it. Whereas the idea of Helvetica was to evoke things like openness, transparency, neutrality, naturalness, etc., the new typeface strikes me as being much more opinionated, but in a purposely understated sort of way.
In a lot of ways it really looks like someone took the core ideologies of modern third-places and distilled them into a visual type system, which maybe says something about the privatization of formerly public spaces and infrastructure over the past 50+ years.
In a lot of ways it really looks like someone took the core ideologies of modern third-places and distilled them into a visual type system, which maybe says something about the privatization of formerly public spaces and infrastructure over the past 50+ years.
But it also adds flexibility with the alternate glyphs, so in a way, less opinionated.
I love that I have no idea whether that second paragraph is a real analysis or one making fun of font nerds.
I mean if you watch the documentary Helvetica they do a pretty good job of explaining both the political statement the typeface was trying to make, the backlash against it as it was adopted/hijacked by corporations, and then the post-backlash period where we are now.
If you look at the new typeface it's clearly designed primarily for the needs of consumer products and advertising. They could have instead created a typeface that was purposely designed to look bad on consumer products and in advertising, but that's not the direction they went in. That's not an accident, it was a deliberate design decision.
Whereas the goal of the original typeface was to create a better society, the goal of the new one is basically to make it onto a Starbucks cup. It's not even a subtle difference, even though it's supposedly just an updated typeface the two are really night and day.
If you look at the new typeface it's clearly designed primarily for the needs of consumer products and advertising. They could have instead created a typeface that was purposely designed to look bad on consumer products and in advertising, but that's not the direction they went in. That's not an accident, it was a deliberate design decision.
Whereas the goal of the original typeface was to create a better society, the goal of the new one is basically to make it onto a Starbucks cup. It's not even a subtle difference, even though it's supposedly just an updated typeface the two are really night and day.
> the political statement the typeface was trying to make
Hmm, I think that a typeface is possibly the least effective way to make a political statement. Approximately zero people looking at it will impute a political message.
Hmm, I think that a typeface is possibly the least effective way to make a political statement. Approximately zero people looking at it will impute a political message.
Less true than you might be aware yourself, actually.
Think of written Russian. Did you think of beautiful cursive Cyrillic as Pushkin would've written or some blocky reverse-R all caps propaganda text?
Wonder why literally everybody associates anything written in "German Gothic” (blackletter, actually, but I digress) is instantly associated with a guy with a Chaplin moustache but who isn't Chaplin?
Why Simplified Chinese was designed to look good with printed serifs which interfered with the Traditional script's typography?
And I'm not even a graphic designer or a “font nerd”...
Think of written Russian. Did you think of beautiful cursive Cyrillic as Pushkin would've written or some blocky reverse-R all caps propaganda text?
Wonder why literally everybody associates anything written in "German Gothic” (blackletter, actually, but I digress) is instantly associated with a guy with a Chaplin moustache but who isn't Chaplin?
Why Simplified Chinese was designed to look good with printed serifs which interfered with the Traditional script's typography?
And I'm not even a graphic designer or a “font nerd”...
Interesting fact: the Nazis actually were trying to get rid of that old German Type and were introducing Sans Fonts a lot.
So these old German typefaces are not inherently political and were only half a decade later adopted by neo nazis who have no deeper knowledge of it’s history. Or you could say, the extreme wish the Nazis had to look modern, got replaced by a wish to go back to a wrongly imagined past (which happens quite often on the extreme political fringes)
So these old German typefaces are not inherently political and were only half a decade later adopted by neo nazis who have no deeper knowledge of it’s history. Or you could say, the extreme wish the Nazis had to look modern, got replaced by a wish to go back to a wrongly imagined past (which happens quite often on the extreme political fringes)
You’re right, that indeed is very interesting. I have to admit I was totally unaware of this. Thanks for sharing.
I do think there are some fonts that develop into having certain associations and meanings; I can't see how a font can be designed to have that association beforehand, but then, I'm not a designer or psychologist.
But there's a definite cultural meaning to certain fonts; what springs to mind is Impact (memes), comic sans (trolling / badly designed websites / your aunt's emails), and "gothic" fonts (nazis) (https://www.dafont.com/mtheme.php?id=4). I can imagine that font designers can take these fonts and their cultural associations and craft something new that evokes these.
But there's a definite cultural meaning to certain fonts; what springs to mind is Impact (memes), comic sans (trolling / badly designed websites / your aunt's emails), and "gothic" fonts (nazis) (https://www.dafont.com/mtheme.php?id=4). I can imagine that font designers can take these fonts and their cultural associations and craft something new that evokes these.
Interestingly enough the Nazis actually tried to get rid of that old German typeface and were all for sans fonts. But these old German typeface was still so dominant during their regime, that in hindsight people (including neo Nazis) started connecting it with Nazis.
That's a good approximate, but I feel these kinds of "statements" are for a select few, and they'll have fun arguing the message's merits or lack-thereof. The rest of the world will continue on with these decisions of taste-makers serving as little more than a slight hum to the harmony of their lives.
Yes, Helvetica is truly a joy to watch - I mean that genuinely - and thank you for the explanation of your analysis
This has all got to be satire, right?
It looks OK from the specimens, Neue Haas Grotesk is still the best Helvetica IMO
...
Font licensing is immoral rent seeking that takes advantage of a legal loophole and goes against the spirit of the law in major countries (typefaces are ineligible for copyright in at least the US and Japan), and I'm always disheartened by how many individual designers and companies have fallen for it.
...
Font licensing is immoral rent seeking that takes advantage of a legal loophole and goes against the spirit of the law in major countries (typefaces are ineligible for copyright in at least the US and Japan), and I'm always disheartened by how many individual designers and companies have fallen for it.
Can you say more about this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protecti...
> Typefaces cannot be protected by copyright in the United States (Code of Federal Regulations, Ch 37, Sec. 202.1(e); Eltra Corp. vs. Ringer). The idea that typefaces (rather than fonts, which are computer software) cannot be copyrighted in the United States is black letter law. 37 C.F.R. § 202.1(e). Under U.S. law, typefaces and their letter forms or glyphs are considered utilitarian objects whose public utility outweighs any private interest in protecting their creative elements. However, there is a distinction between a font and a typeface. The machine code used to display a stylized typeface (called a font) is protectable as copyright. In 1992, the US Copyright Office determined that digital outline fonts had elements that could be protected as software. Since that time, the Office has accepted registration of copyright for digital vector fonts, such as PostScript Type 1, TrueType, and OpenType format files.
TL;DR
"On a computer, a typeface isn't a typeface so you have to pay us for it"
c.f. Apple and rounded corners, Mickey Mouse...
> Typefaces cannot be protected by copyright in the United States (Code of Federal Regulations, Ch 37, Sec. 202.1(e); Eltra Corp. vs. Ringer). The idea that typefaces (rather than fonts, which are computer software) cannot be copyrighted in the United States is black letter law. 37 C.F.R. § 202.1(e). Under U.S. law, typefaces and their letter forms or glyphs are considered utilitarian objects whose public utility outweighs any private interest in protecting their creative elements. However, there is a distinction between a font and a typeface. The machine code used to display a stylized typeface (called a font) is protectable as copyright. In 1992, the US Copyright Office determined that digital outline fonts had elements that could be protected as software. Since that time, the Office has accepted registration of copyright for digital vector fonts, such as PostScript Type 1, TrueType, and OpenType format files.
TL;DR
"On a computer, a typeface isn't a typeface so you have to pay us for it"
c.f. Apple and rounded corners, Mickey Mouse...
It's a common misconception that fonts are only the implementation of typefaces on computers. The specific weights and sizes of glyphs that comprise a font apply both to traditional typesetting and in its digital form.
A font file is more akin to a photograph than to the environment of which the photo is taken, so it's not clear why the morality of licensing photos and fonts would apply any differently.
A font file is more akin to a photograph than to the environment of which the photo is taken, so it's not clear why the morality of licensing photos and fonts would apply any differently.
Fonts are not like photos, they have hinting and kerning and conditional code that distinguishes a high quality font from crap. The glyph substitution table in OpenType fonts is of such complexity that it's been shown to be Turing complete. [https://litherum.blogspot.com/2019/03/addition-font.html]
I wasn’t arguing that fonts are more or less complex than photos, but that from the perspective of implementation and/or copyright, fonts are more like photos (which are implicitly under copyright in the U.S.) than the subject of a photo (like, say, a pasture, a person or a horse).
In other words, a font is the specific representation of the concept, idea and qualities that define a typeface, as a photo is a representation of the qualities of its subject.
In other words, a font is the specific representation of the concept, idea and qualities that define a typeface, as a photo is a representation of the qualities of its subject.
Did you just called monospaced fonts crap?
Not sure about kerning, but monospace fonts do have hinting so that rasterizing any size still works without big aliasing and weight problems.
> A font file is more akin to a photograph than to the environment of which the photo is taken, so it's not clear why the morality of licensing photos and fonts would apply any differently.
See Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. Sorry in advance if I misunderstood your point
See Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. Sorry in advance if I misunderstood your point
Then why isn't every high profile font from Hoefler etc. immediately cloned by a generic competitor?
A while ago there was a case when the guy behind Maven Pro produced a very nice font that felt vaguely like Whitney. Lo and behold, not two days after he delisted it. When pressed for reasons, he said he got a letter from Hoefler himself on how one cannot get insipired by other people's work, chided him for being unoriginal and implied dire legal consequences of not taking it down immediately. Mind you, the point of contention was a _feel_ of the font.
Do you have a link? Would love to read up more.
You can find illicit copies of almost every font online for free if you know where to look. I suspect that puts a bit of a damper on the "generic clones" market strategy, since folks who _really_ want a cheaper alternative can get one for free.
Also, font companies are big and can threaten legal action, and even the threat of legal action can put people off, even if US law makes the font letter-shapes themselves not copyrightable.
Also, font companies are big and can threaten legal action, and even the threat of legal action can put people off, even if US law makes the font letter-shapes themselves not copyrightable.
I imagine it's a lot of work to reverse engineer all of the variants and all of the characters and all of the kerning rules etc. And then you can't advertise because the original name that everyone knows is trademarked.
>And then you can't advertise because the original name that everyone knows is trademarked.
Does that stop any counterfeit? You get it close enough, get the content visible and tank the price, and the name doesn’t stop squat.
And ofc naturally counterfeit markets spring up, where consumers go specifically with intent to purchase the fake (at severe discount), completely sidestepping the naming/marketing issue
Does that stop any counterfeit? You get it close enough, get the content visible and tank the price, and the name doesn’t stop squat.
And ofc naturally counterfeit markets spring up, where consumers go specifically with intent to purchase the fake (at severe discount), completely sidestepping the naming/marketing issue
So in the US you cannot patent a typeface, but you can patent software... Doesn't seem very logical to me.
I'd happily license more (web)fonts if more of them would be available with perpetual licenses without display volume licensing.
At the moment, I'm basically required to include traffic trackers for many of the best fonts.
At the moment, I'm basically required to include traffic trackers for many of the best fonts.
The name Helvetica Now seems like an April Fools' joke. The name will not age well, plus there is potential for confusion with Helvetica Neue.
Not disagreeing, but to be fair, Helvetica Neue (neue meaning new in German), did not age well either. I would assume the creators are aware of that, maybe even choosing that name to be in the tradition of Neue.
absolutely grotesque
Maybe so, but please don't post unsubstantive comments here. What would make a comment like this interesting is specific information about what is bad in the diff and why. (That, plus maybe a bit less name-calling.)
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Edit: no, you guys are right, I totally didn't get the joke.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Edit: no, you guys are right, I totally didn't get the joke.
I think you got swooshed, a bit. The GP was almost certainly making a pun. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sans-serif#Grotesque
I thought so too but dang's post history shows knowledge of type. Maybe dang is saying that calling this a grotesque font is name calling and poster should post more on why it is one.
It's not name calling. It's a typeface nerd joke.
He specifically says "what is bad" -- he simply didn't get the joke. No need to prance to defense of the mods when they miss something.
Ok what do I need to know to get this joke?
Grotesque in the context of typography is a category of sans serif typefaces, specifically the one from which typefaces like Helvetica descend (they are usually called neo-grotesque). So the GP joke is based on a double meaning: on a first read it may seem an insult, but typographically he is just stating a quite obvious thing: that Helvetica Now is a grotesque typeface.
The alternate name for Helvetica is "Neue Haas Grotesk".
Does this mean Apple will license this and include it in macOS the way it does (presumably) with Helvetica and Helvetica Neue? I really have no idea how something like this happens.
Apple no longer use this front. They have created their own font, San Francisco, and started using it 3 to 4 years ago.
Edit: oh, I misunderstood! Apple might start using it, but they are not compelled to. A lot of other fonts such as Palatino have also been updated, but Apple doesn’t include them (yet).
Edit: oh, I misunderstood! Apple might start using it, but they are not compelled to. A lot of other fonts such as Palatino have also been updated, but Apple doesn’t include them (yet).
Its not installed as an available font in MacOS, even though the its used for the UI. You can get it here if you want to use it within their licensing guidlines:
https://developer.apple.com/fonts/
Likewise, Microsoft has released a bunch of updated system fonts. Arial Nova, Georgia Pro, Gill Sans Nova, Rockwell Nova, and Verdana Pro.
Side-by-side comparison?
The Verge also did an interview with the designers [1]; I prefer The Verge interview to the Creative Boom announcement [2] that's the article link at the time of writing, because the interview adds detail behind the design process and reads much less like a marketing announcement.
Truly the most amusing thing about the new typefaces are the alternate forms of certain iconic letters. The alternate forms are more classically resemble the legendary Akzidenz-Grotesk, in the tradition of paring back the few flourishes that Helvetica did have.
Ironically some of the alternate forms also make it resemble Arial, Monotype's famous metric-identical Helvetica clone, despite Monotype's long insistence that Arial is less grotesk and more humanist. But I also found the not-sure-if-serious dissing of Arial to be mostly signalling and snobbery. Other alternate forms seem a bit odd, as if someone was playing 'design your own sans-serif typeface' and filled out the missing cells of a big row-column table for completion, like here's a geometric 't', and a humanist 'l'.
But all that aside, the new typefaces look nice and are redrawn with purpose. The micro variant actually makes Helvetica usable at small sizes for the first time. It's a well-crafted family in the honor of a classic.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/9/18302057/helvetica-now-new... [2] https://www.creativeboom.com/resources/monotype-launches-the...
Truly the most amusing thing about the new typefaces are the alternate forms of certain iconic letters. The alternate forms are more classically resemble the legendary Akzidenz-Grotesk, in the tradition of paring back the few flourishes that Helvetica did have.
Ironically some of the alternate forms also make it resemble Arial, Monotype's famous metric-identical Helvetica clone, despite Monotype's long insistence that Arial is less grotesk and more humanist. But I also found the not-sure-if-serious dissing of Arial to be mostly signalling and snobbery. Other alternate forms seem a bit odd, as if someone was playing 'design your own sans-serif typeface' and filled out the missing cells of a big row-column table for completion, like here's a geometric 't', and a humanist 'l'.
But all that aside, the new typefaces look nice and are redrawn with purpose. The micro variant actually makes Helvetica usable at small sizes for the first time. It's a well-crafted family in the honor of a classic.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/9/18302057/helvetica-now-new... [2] https://www.creativeboom.com/resources/monotype-launches-the...
There‘s a relative to Helvetica, Unica, with quite an interesting story:
https://lineto.com/Lineto.com/Frontpage+Features/LL+Unica77/
How do you "re-design" a font? Isn't that just making an entirely new font with a subtley different style? Or is this more backfilling tons of unpopulated UTF-8 characters that aren't covered by the original font?
Where can I read more about the history of these “big hitter” fonts? It’s interesting to hear about the context within which they were created.
How is this $300 Helvetica compared to the free Noto font (which has sans-serif, serif and monospace from condensed extra light to bold)?
The article mentions a single story lowercase 'a' and straight-legged capital 'R'... does anyone have a comparison for these? I'm unable to see it on https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-now
https://www.myfonts.com/fonts/mti/helvetica-now/ lets you choose stylistic alternates. Stylistic set 04 is straight-legged R.
Why is the T presented as though it is always aligned relative to its middle bar? Not only would this be an incredibly bad idea, it is (fortunately) not done on the official site [0]
[0] https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-now
[0] https://www.monotype.com/fonts/helvetica-now
I'm not too knowledgeable about fonts (although I did learn how to spot Arial from Helvetica in that famous essay). Why does the uppercase R with its curvy "right leg" feel out of place with everything else that's straight?
So...
My dad was a typesetter and prepress technician for years. His favourite font was helvetica. I sent him this link. Here are his comments:
>They fucked with "R" the only way too tell them abart, and they gave it a streight leg.
>They messed with the dots wich was the othe way you could tell.
My dad was a typesetter and prepress technician for years. His favourite font was helvetica. I sent him this link. Here are his comments:
>They fucked with "R" the only way too tell them abart, and they gave it a streight leg.
>They messed with the dots wich was the othe way you could tell.
Design comment: what's the deal with the googly eyes in the static header on mobile?
It’s creative. bOOm.
I actually liked it. Often text logos can compete with the main text and headings in an article. Especially on mobile. Keeping the top nav all icons made the text of the article pop a bit more.
This may be different from my phone to yours, but the eyes bounced back and forth on Safari mobile. This definitely took attention away from the article.
Gotta say, the f and the t in the micro font are not good. At least while looking at it in my browser (firefox nightly on linux). They look like something out of comic sans.
I was hoping 'l' and 'I' would look differently.
I think it’s quite legible at intended sizes, though. Around 6pt or less.
Here’s a screengrab from a “2x retina” display of the sales page showing 8pt (so view this at 50%)
https://i.imgur.com/9tpX2Vq.png
https://i.imgur.com/9tpX2Vq.png
Look at it in the intended size, and it looks great.
Is it really "the most ubiquitous font"? I always notice when someone has used Helvetica itself rather than some generic sans serif clone and it's not that often.
In my view, Univers evokes a deep feeling of sophistication unlike any other font. Helvetica has the “grunge” and New York aesthetic after it took over the graphic design scene in the 70’s and 80’s whereas Univers was silently used in engineering manuals, control panels, branding, keyboards(Apple), movie credits [2] and UI without much fuss. It never became cool and edgy as Helvetica, never tried to be something it is not and doesn't have a following. I was lucky enough to visit the archives [3] in a obscure drawer at the Museum fur Gestaltung in Zurich, seeing the original manuscripts of Univers was an extraordinary feeling. Created in 1950, it is truly timeless and sits along with other giants of contemporary typefaces such as Futura and Eurostile, perhaps in the back row towards the corner.
Univers was, is and always will be.
It’s my favorite font.
[1] https://www.myfonts.com/fonts/linotype/univers-next/
[2] https://www.dafont.com/forum/read/5633/what-s-the-font-for-m...
[3] https://www.eguide.ch/en/designer/adrian-frutiger/