How should an organization keep track of the number of users working with a font? It's an expensive and practical problem that's outside the core business of any company. Even with the most expensive package, there is still a cap and that's a at 1500 USD which is a steep price considering the competition is free.
Then we have the license agreement. First it's too long. Yes seriously. Getting company lawyers involved makes sense when doing something risky, expensive or complicated like hiring from abroad. Not for using a font or buying a cup of coffee. There is nothing complicated about these transactions. It's made complicated by the agreement.
Skimming through the contract...
> you undertake to keep all copies of the Font Software secure and to maintain accurate and up-to-date records of the number and locations of all copies of the Font Software
Expensive and practically difficult in a small organization and even worse in a bigger one.
> These terms are governed by English law and you can bring legal proceedings in respect of the products in the English courts.
Well that's great, now we need an _English_ legal team.
This is a fantasy.
Cutting type used to require a huge amount of skill of course, but it is relatively easy to design well drawn type with modern software these days. It takes time to draw multiple weights and styles, but it's certainly not as skillful as most would assume. The number of new "foundries" that have popped up over the past few years is telling.
The amount organisations used to pay for custom type jobs was insane, given how much work it actually was to deliver them. The value attached to the aesthetic of the particular designer being hired is also debatable in my experience, very rarely did clients reject or amend what they were presented with. I've also drawn fonts that have been attributed to other designers, and nobody seems to notice.
I think things are changing slowly as the market becomes more saturated, but licensing like this is outdated in my opinion.
For anyone looking for a beautiful geometric sans-serif with an open source license, I can highly recommend Inter: https://rsms.me/inter/
Inter appears to have broader language support, has a variable font version, and is also now available via Google Fonts (for anyone who cares about that). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_font
That's an interesting clause given that everyone can just download the font files from the linked web page. Or do the original font files contain information that isn't in the WOFF format?
Typographers struggle to make a living in most cases, but yet they don't offer better font licenses. I don't understand why they don't make it simple single license term for all usecases and make a sale. It's masochistic.
Thankfully there are some quite nice SIL or OTF licenced fonts available.
Similarly, all the people saying the competition is free aren't the target market for a good quality font with a degree of exclusivity. You aren't going to find that combination from sources like Google Fonts.
Meanwhile, the kind of customer who is going to value this kind of work and actually pay for it is probably going to accept the licensing conditions. They might not like them either, but since almost everyone offering something to this market is doing so on similar terms right now, it's a take-it-or-leave-it kind of deal.
Standard form contracts saying they are governed by the laws of the place where the supplier is based are also completely routine. US companies frequently even specify an individual state favourable to them for this purpose. And yet, business still happens.
But genuinely, I think it's because the post is really quite well written and on a subject that's probably a bit esoteric to most people.
Also kudos to the Cinetype. I believe more foundries should offer licenses in package (1-3 user install, 10-20k web, maybe even 1 book).
https://fontsarena.com/blog/font-licensing-is-ill-please-hel...
Licensing is tricky, as others have already commented - I'd personally like to see a simple, affordable license for small biz.
I understand if it's not practical to offer a smaller/cheaper license. This is the first set of fonts I've ever been interested in paying money for, so great job!
Quick answer about the product usage: the font can be embedded in a limited amount of products (defined in the License chosen). Products can be, for example, apps, softwares, video games, ebooks, dashboards, mobile devices.
What initially attracted you to crafting typefaces? And what continues to fuel your attraction to this specific area of design?
I guess today I’m still doing this for three primary reasons:
– It allows me to discover and learn new things daily. Letters are everywhere and with so many forms and functions that I won’t get never bored and as society and culture develops, so design does, including type design.
– It gives me full control of the design and production processes; I can make a typeface from the first sketches to the final delivery with no need of a print-shop, or a factory, or anything else. This also means that I’m fully responsible of all the problems you will see in my typefaces. But it’s ok, I like to be accountable for what I do : )
– It is a sort of monastic, iper-focused specialty that requires a lot of attention and discipline, and somehow fits pretty well with my designer persona. I find it to be a pretty zen activity.
I haven’t noticed anything in the lowercase ‘b’, but I’m running further rasterisation tests as we speak, and I’ll push out an update that hopefully addresses the issue. Thanks a lot for the feedback. Much appreciated.
a has a larger aperture than c, s, C, S, e, etc.
f, t have unusually sharp overhangs but that's the style you're going for. I am not a fan of IBM's Plex's sharp corners either because it ruins the texture of the font. Either make all corners tight or not. Their argument is "Machine + Humans" or "Tight corners + Soft curves" but your eyes don't give a shit about those things.
a's tail is too long
A, V have a massive opened corners (usually done for small size readability) but Z, X, Y's crotch doesn't. You need consistency here.
Double-story g is hard to justify in a font based on drafting templates and generally doesn't feel like it fits into this type of a typeface. However, its ok to take some liberty here.
Fitting needs work first. S's side bearings need to be cut down by a lot. o, c, e's fitting is much larger than it should be.
There is a lot of work to be done here. I am pretty grumpy generally so don't take this too seriously. Have fun and hope you're enjoying the process!
As a general rule, I recommend eschewing one-size-fits-all rules with fonts. Let the users customize. Some dyslexic people find Comic Sans more readable than most other fonts.
Serif fonts were worse for reading on the blurry screens that we all used to have. But now that print-like resolution on phones and laptops is commonplace, the classic rules for typography have reasserted their relevance on the web. Nevertheless, because of fashion and force of habit, sans-serif fonts still predominate.
(Typo in final para; “Fabbrica is a solid typeface”.)
Did I miss where the name comes from?
*sorry
I don't want to make a flippant comment, but yeah, get with the times and stuff.
Great design though.
It is none of the above. It’s an expression that people use to subjectively express how something makes them feel. In this case, there are certain characteristics to this typeface that lead people to say they feel “warmth”.
Just like when you go to a really happening party and say, “it feels alive in here”. Would it hold up to a randomised trial? Probably, or probably not. It doesn’t matter. The point is about how it made someone feel, and we now know. How would it make you feel? Whatever the answer is, is your perspective and your truth.
There’s a time and place for predictable, measurable results from randomised trials. This is not one of them. None of the great art from history were the result of scientific rigour.
It behooves one to observe reality through multiple perspectives, and question what the meaning of “real” is. I sense that randomised trials would not yield measurable and predictable results for this either.
In this case, "warmth" refers mostly to the rounded corners and unique design quirks, which are meant to imply "I was crafted in analog by a seasoned master draftsman, not merely constructed from sterile geometric shapes by some hipster on a Macbook."
I have never made a font, but I have a implemented many text rendering systems over the years and worked with thousands of fonts.
I do find some warmth in their typeface.
The typeface looks sloppy and unrefined on my 4k windows machine running chrome. Certainly not functional, utilitarian, or elegant. The stems are of inconsistent width and glyphs are generally of inconsistent weight. I'm picking up no 'manufactured' vibes from such an organic look.
Might consider it for our company font. Currently use the roboto family
