Notes on multi-script typeface design

Slides from a talk given at Granshan 2014 Design & Identity, in Munich.

Transcript

1. Notes on multi-script 
 typeface design Gerry Leonidas
2. Introduction: A comment on the current state of typeface design for non-Latin scripts, summarising the points made on 
 “Going Global” [next four slides]
3. 1. two and a half steps
4. 1) Providing basic, 
 but correct, support
5. 2) Covering mainstream 
 genre requirements
6. 3) Innovating in typeface design 
 to support rich typography
7. 2. Multi-script or Other-script?
8. Distinguishing between designing typefaces for documents integrating more than one script, and designing typefaces for scripts that the designer 
 is unfamiliar with, for overwhelmingly single-script use.
9. One script: Typographic adaptation 
 to typesetting processes
10. In the case of new single-script typefaces, the main challenge has been the adaptation of script complexity to the limitations of type-making and typesetting systems developed for another context.
11. Risk: research is time-consuming, costly, difficult, or even impossible
12. Commercial pressures (time allocation, budget limits, lack of sufficient clarity at the project definition) and the variable access to trustworthy information and feedback jeopardise projects.
13. Multi-script: Parallel texts or embedded 
 words and sentences
14. Distinguishing between one column 
 of a script next to, or opposite to, one 
 in another script (e.g. in a translated text) and embedded use (e.g. a word 
 or a phrase in one script within sentences in another).
15. Risk: the assumptions of the dominant 
 script determine design decisions
16. Features from the original script can be shoehorned onto the “secondary” script. These may include vertical proportions, stroke dimensions and modulation, terminal formation, handling of punctuation, and so on.
17. Latinisation and / or Typographicisation* ! ! * invented word
18. Latinisation: the design of a non-Latin script using design patterns and even specific formal elements from the Latin, usually with a mismatch between the typographic and stylistic connotations of the two scripts (e.g. “modern” ).
19. Typographicisation: the adaptation of 
 a script that has forms and behaviour determined by written forms to the constraints of a type-making and typesetting system. This script may 
 often be used on its own.
20. 3 Design challenges
21. Type-making and typesetting tools Legacy “typewriter” fonts Latin-centric terminology
22. Limitations examples: character sets, many-to-many substitutions. “Typewriter” fonts: from actual type- writers, to early digital. Of marginal formal quality, developed under extreme limitations, but still influential.
23. Character set determinism Algorithmic line-level behaviours Changes within a community’s
 memory
24. Character sets change over time, across documents, and communities. The “definitive” versions might not exist. Intensely context-dependent substitutions. Changes to a script across generations.
25. Western type-family compositions Input conventions Minority scripts, dialects, and 
 regional “parallel identities”
26. Type family conventions for weight / width / style from Latin typefaces that do not transfer easily to another script. Communities sharing a complex script, but not a language, an orthography, or international visibility.
27. Stroke modulation and proportions Range of curves and counters Range of in/out points Number of continuous strokes
28. The variability of radii and counter shapes are most likely more complex than in the Latin; stroke dimensions tend to respond to these factors. Transferring the logic of the ductus into the typographic forms.
29. Parity with existing styles Opportunities for expansion
30. The fewer the existing relevant typefaces for a script, the more pressure for new ones to relate to them. Conventional ways to expand a type family may not apply to a non-Latin script, requiring innovative thinking.
31. The cultural moment! Modernity vs. convention Variety and differentiation Identity and exploration
32. Typefaces respond to and reflect the range from language preservation to mainstream textual communication, 
 to imported / novel genres that express aspirational classes and generational identification.
33. p.s. Where’s the intelligence?
34. As a typeface project develops, how do we capture the design decisions and the knowledge generated? And how is this built upon across projects? Our current workflows aim at final outputs, not capturing and analysing processes.
35. N.b. No part of this discussion 
 needs to stem from the 
 technology of type-making.
36. We lack a clear, shared language 
 to discuss typeface design decisions 
 for shapes and behaviours that is independent of the means of making fonts.
37. Thank you! ! @gerryleonidas @typefacedesign