_______ __ _______ | |
| | |.---.-..----.| |--..-----..----. | | |.-----..--.--.--..-----. | |
| || _ || __|| < | -__|| _| | || -__|| | | ||__ --| | |
|___|___||___._||____||__|__||_____||__| |__|____||_____||________||_____| | |
on Gopher (inofficial) | |
Visit Hacker News on the Web | |
COMMENT PAGE FOR: | |
Remnants of a legendary typeface have been rescued from the Thames | |
HumanProtractor wrote 1 hour 4 min ago: | |
[1] Archive link, this site won't load at all for me. | |
[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20240507064635/https://news.artnet... | |
ada1981 wrote 15 hours 55 min ago: | |
Wild they didnât include an example of the actual typeface in the | |
article. | |
Also, Iâm curious how there were 500,000 pieces in the typeface. | |
aidenn0 wrote 17 hours 21 min ago: | |
Thames Old Roman? | |
pimlottc wrote 22 hours 27 min ago: | |
Thereâs a great episode of the Futility Closet podcast about the | |
Doves Type and the dispute that lead to it being dumped into the | |
Thames: | |
[1]: https://www.futilitycloset.com/2017/09/04/podcast-episode-168-... | |
TehCorwiz wrote 1 day ago: | |
Again? I swear this happened about a decade ago. Yeah, here it is: [1] | |
EDIT: It's the same typeface. | |
[1]: https://metro.co.uk/2015/03/15/lost-typeface-rediscovered-almo... | |
KaiserPro wrote 1 day ago: | |
You might also like "Zilvertype" which is from the dutch font school of | |
roughly the same time. | |
[1]: https://www.alphabettes.org/zilvertype/ | |
wrp wrote 1 day ago: | |
There was also a revival of the Doves type made by Torbjörn Olsson in | |
1994. It is no longer available, but you can find the old specimen PDF | |
at the Internet Archive and extract the embedded fonts. The weight is a | |
bit lighter than the Robert Green version, but also has an italic face. | |
[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20121127135748/home1.swipnet.se/~w... | |
rawling wrote 1 day ago: | |
Curious as to why this refers to recovering the type being important to | |
creating a digital version of the typeface, when lower in the article | |
it shows that there is a surviving bible. Couldn't that have already | |
been used to reproduce the font? | |
wrp wrote 1 day ago: | |
Due to irregular spreading of the ink when printing, the shapes on | |
the page are not perfect representations of the type shape, so the | |
true shape of the metal form has to be inferred from comparing | |
multiple printed samples. | |
There are digital reproductions of old typefaces that try to | |
reproduce the actual weight on the page, but they seem to be not very | |
popular with modern designers unless they are going for a | |
deliberately archaic look. | |
gus_massa wrote 1 day ago: | |
I'd expect the original designers to know and consider that effect, | |
and make the types slightly thiner, so the printed version looks as | |
intended. | |
wrp wrote 1 day ago: | |
They did and that is a huge point of contention in the revival of | |
classic typefaces. In the 1970s, there was a massive push to | |
digitize existing founts, but the type companies did it by | |
tracing the metal rather than the prints. The result was digital | |
fonts that printed much lighter than the original metal type. | |
Most digitizations of early 20th-century typefaces you can find | |
have this problem. | |
By the late 1970s, people began to pay more heed to the actual | |
printed shapes. I like early 20th-century typographic style and | |
am always on the lookout for good type reproductions, but there | |
are two other factors that come into play. One is that a font | |
designed to look a certain way when press-printed won't look | |
quite the same coming out of your laser printer. The other is | |
that modern taste is for thinner lines. When I use a revival of a | |
classic type, I want it to look at it did back when, but | |
apparently I'm in the minority. | |
dhosek wrote 16 hours 8 min ago: | |
Itâs also a matter of printing technology, letterpress, vs | |
offset. The latter tends to have less ink spread. Itâs also a | |
matter of printing on dry vs damp paper (letterpress works best | |
on slightly dampened sheets of paper which contributes to the | |
ink spread). Then there are things like subtle curves that | |
donât digitize well (digital Optima is a poor approximation | |
of the original analog letterforms). | |
rozab wrote 17 hours 47 min ago: | |
The worst symptom of this imo is the inclusion of ink traps in | |
digital fonts. I think they look awful, especially when blown | |
up to poster size. | |
blt wrote 14 hours 7 min ago: | |
most serious fonts have separate "display" variants for such | |
applications, whereas the version accounting for ink spread | |
is called "text" or "book". | |
dhosek wrote 16 hours 10 min ago: | |
The problem is not the ink traps but the lack of optical | |
scaling. | |
mihaic wrote 1 day ago: | |
PSA for the inspiration for this font, the great Nicolas Jenson, who | |
around 1470 had pretty much perfected the latin typeface. | |
Later, more famous types, such as Caslon or Garamond, are just | |
variations on this. | |
dhosek wrote 16 hours 6 min ago: | |
Not really. Jensonâs typeface (modern revivals include Montypeâs | |
Centaur and Adobe Jenson) retained a lot of calligraphic features | |
which figure less in later faces. Garamond is much more of a type | |
design than lettering in type and Caslon is wholly typographic in its | |
nature. | |
mihaic wrote 8 hours 32 min ago: | |
You are technically correct. Even though that's the best kind of | |
correct, I'd see these later developments as mostly natural | |
refinements of the medium, that didn't really alter the | |
fundamentals. | |
From Jenson until the first Grotesk fonts I don't think there was | |
anything large one-time leap, but rather a sequence of gradual | |
evolutions. | |
komali2 wrote 1 day ago: | |
I'm wryly curious why fonts are among the odd things that really get | |
the goat of us turbo-nerds on forums like HN. | |
Biganon wrote 23 hours 25 min ago: | |
It has just the right balance of technology, art, history, and trivia | |
fun facts. Makes it one of the best topics for us nerds. | |
Also, programmers spend a huge fraction of their time reading. | |
Reading code, reading docs, reading reading reading. Fonts are | |
important for us from an ergonomic point of view (and it's also a | |
matter of taste and aesthetics!) | |
mrbluecoat wrote 21 hours 59 min ago: | |
Agreed, same reason the Monaspace font 1.1 release made news: | |
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40267120 | |
mihaic wrote 1 day ago: | |
When you spend most of your day staring at text on a screen, the | |
minutia of how that text looks like become very important. | |
AnthonBerg wrote 1 day ago: | |
The centuries-old artistry of mass reproduction of thought has many | |
wonderful minutiae!, as high technology often does. | |
baerrie wrote 1 day ago: | |
Nicola White documents here interesting mudlarking adventures on | |
youtube, I recommend it! | |
[1]: https://youtu.be/rVxncipNvvY?si=1DGluOHT8T5fRNfE | |
JNRowe wrote 1 day ago: | |
We've had centuries of embankment works along the Thames¹, a fair bit | |
concentrated around the areas you'd expect to find type like this². | |
There must be a phenomenal amount of history that was purposely covered | |
around there. Given the scale of the works you'd have to imagine there | |
is a significant chunk of non-London history to be found there too(the | |
scale of granite imports from Cornwall being an obvious example). | |
I'm less optimistic about the possibility of more large scale digs | |
though, as the Golden Jubilee bridge history³ points out the area is | |
an also an exciting zone for stumbling in to unexploded ordnance and | |
you always seem to be within few metres of a tube line or Victorian | |
sewer. | |
[It is the reason I love those plucky Crossrailâ´ developers who've | |
felt the anger from the havoc they've left across London over the few | |
past decades. We get incredible large scale engineering works to lust | |
over, coupled with really wacky archaeological digs tagging along for | |
the ride.] | |
¹ [1] ² [2] - Both the "home" of the type in Hammersmith and Fleet | |
were the targets of embankment work in the 19th century | |
³ [3] ⴠ| |
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embanking_of_the_tidal_Thames | |
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thames_Embankment | |
[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_Bridge_and_Golden_Jub... | |
[4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossrail | |
lostlogin wrote 1 day ago: | |
On a trip to London and having heard of mudlarking, I walked in one | |
of the âbeachesâ. I immediately found an old belt belt buckle and | |
about 20 stems from old clay pipes. | |
My father found a 17th century cork screw. | |
There must be an absolute wealth of finds along its banks. | |
morrbo wrote 1 day ago: | |
We actually have this. Obviously not this particular font. My family | |
were all printers and I've sort of inherited a huge cabinet full of old | |
school typefaces all carved out of some special kind of hard wood - | |
pear wood - all over 100 years old. Absolutely 0 idea what we can do | |
with it, but it's all hand made and very cool. Felt pertinet to share | |
lol | |
317070 wrote 1 day ago: | |
Maybe drop Robert Green (the man behind this article) an email on: | |
[1]: https://typespec.co.uk/custom-font-services/ | |
bradrn wrote 1 day ago: | |
Klim Type Foundry [1] may also be worth a contact â theyâve | |
been inspired by woodcut type before (e.g. [2] [3]), so I wonder if | |
they might be interested in knowing about this. [1] [2] [1] | |
blog/maelstrom-design-information/ [3] [1] | |
blog/manuka-design-information/ | |
[1]: https://klim.co.nz/ | |
[2]: https://klim.co.nz/blog/maelstrom-design-information/ | |
[3]: https://klim.co.nz/blog/manuka-design-information/ | |
riwsky wrote 1 day ago: | |
Thames New Roman | |
paledot wrote 1 hour 37 min ago: | |
I came looking for this and was not disappointed. (Though I also | |
appreciate that the top comment is more thoughtful, a credit to HN's | |
priorities.) | |
surfingdino wrote 1 day ago: | |
You win the Internet today :-) | |
rayiner wrote 23 hours 56 min ago: | |
Whoever downvoted this has no soul. | |
fuzzfactor wrote 22 hours 38 min ago: | |
Don't disrespect the downvote-a-bot ! | |
What's you expecting a soul for? | |
Jerrrry wrote 22 hours 57 min ago: | |
>pun | |
>you win the internet | |
>downvote | |
It is against the rules to tell you which rule you are breaking. | |
hint hint. | |
raldi wrote 1 day ago: | |
Iâm left wanting to hear more about the motivation for dumping the | |
type in the first place. What kind of swindle was suspected? Did the | |
partner try to reconstruct the type? | |
surfingdino wrote 1 day ago: | |
[1]: https://youtu.be/e8harWbZN6U?si=4D5ZDCn2WLlciy5T&t=1002 | |
dang wrote 1 day ago: | |
Related. Others? I think there were others. | |
The lost Doves Press typeface and its revival (2015) - [1] - Aug 2019 | |
(9 comments) | |
How the Doves Type Was Nearly Lost - [2] - Sept 2016 (44 comments) | |
One man's obsession with rediscovering the Doves typeface - [3] - July | |
2015 (32 comments) | |
Lost typeface printing blocks found in river Thames - [4] - Feb 2015 | |
(22 comments) | |
The fight over the Doves: A legendary typeface gets a second life - [5] | |
- Dec 2013 (12 comments) | |
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20791125 | |
[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12476579 | |
[3]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9951869 | |
[4]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9017307 | |
[5]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6964013 | |
proactivesvcs wrote 1 day ago: | |
There were many more, but these were all dang could find after pg | |
threw them in the river. | |
jprd wrote 1 day ago: | |
I spittaked coffee all over my monitor just now. I know this sounds | |
like a Reddit comment, but I couldn't help but big-up your joke. | |
Well played. | |
unraveller wrote 1 day ago: | |
Doves is insanely easy on the eyes despite so much going on. There is | |
also mebinac[1] an unauthorized contemporary take on the original | |
doves. Mebinac doesn't leap off the page as well yet deals with modern | |
punctuation in a more normal way. | |
Personally you can freely use them to great affect in your RSS reader | |
or mail app that you read everyday. | |
[1]: https://fontsme.com/mebinac.font | |
marviel wrote 21 hours 23 min ago: | |
On "unauthorized" -- how would this not be public domain at this | |
point? | |
unraveller wrote 11 hours 1 min ago: | |
I meant unauthorized in the autobiographical approval sense, the | |
original doves creator frowned upon any modern takes of his | |
typeface, the new designer acknowledged this and let us know. | |
wizzwizz4 wrote 19 hours 23 min ago: | |
Copyright doesn't apply to typefaces. | |
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_protec... | |
solardev wrote 14 hours 5 min ago: | |
Interestingly, the font seems to be copyrighted because it's | |
code...? | |
So if you see someone's web font, can you print it out and then | |
redigitize it into a font and bypass copyright that way...? | |
tasuki wrote 21 hours 15 min ago: | |
Unauthorized doesn't mean it isn't in the public domain. It means | |
there was no authorization. | |
marviel wrote 21 hours 6 min ago: | |
Certainly -- I'm just not sure who would "authorize" it in the | |
first place. | |
_emacsomancer_ wrote 23 hours 55 min ago: | |
A discussion of other digitisations: | |
[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20220705070449/http://luc.devroy... | |
criddell wrote 1 day ago: | |
When you are looking for a font, how can you know which grapheme | |
clusters have glyphs? Is there some classification system for fonts | |
that let you know how complete they are? | |
eslaught wrote 20 hours 9 min ago: | |
[1]: https://wakamaifondue.com/ | |
AnthonBerg wrote 1 day ago: | |
Thanks!, hadnât come across Mebinac. Itâs quite good! | |
Iâm also a big fan of Igino Mariniâs recreation of the Fell | |
typefaces: | |
The Fell Types took their name from John Fell, a Bishop of Oxford in | |
the seventeenth-century. Not only he created an unique collection of | |
printing types but he started one of the most important adventures in | |
the history of typography. â [1] The IM Fell fonts themselves seem | |
to live on Google Fonts these days: [2] I use Doves Type for⦠| |
everything. One day I started to find my monomaniacal obsession a bit | |
funny and sort of to spite myself I set every font in Firefox to | |
Doves Type. Serif, sans-serif, monospace, no other fonts allowed, as | |
well as the UI font by tweaking the Firefox user profile iirc. | |
And it was just⦠very good. And I kept using it. | |
I use Doves Type for everything, and to be able to do that on my | |
phone I use iFont: [3] Or yeah I do use IBM PC VGA 9x16, IBM BIOS | |
8x8, and Eagle Spirit PC CGA Board Alternate 3 a little :) From the | |
Ultimate Oldschool PC Font Pack: [4] I even munged together a | |
combination of Doves Type Regular and IM Fell Great Primer Italic | |
that matches the character scale and linespacing to both each other | |
and to the IBM PC VGA 9x16 font at 1:1 size. The open-source | |
FontForge did the trick!: [5] (FontForge can autogenerate italics for | |
any font. If youâre bored, I suggest loading up the classic VGA | |
font and pressing the ITALICIZE button on ot. Itâs⦠interesting!) | |
In general, on Windows I much prefer MacTypeâs fomt rendering: [6] | |
⦠itâs kind of amazing that this kind of surgery is even | |
possible. | |
[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20240128075552/https://iginomari... | |
[2]: https://fonts.google.com/?query=Igino+Marini | |
[3]: https://apps.apple.com/is/app/ifont-find-install-any-font/id... | |
[4]: https://int10h.org/oldschool-pc-fonts/ | |
[5]: https://fontforge.org/en-US/ | |
[6]: https://www.mactype.net | |
dovesseeker wrote 22 hours 42 min ago: | |
I've become enamored of this typeface as well as of this morning, | |
moved even if I'm honest, but I'm having trouble finding one that | |
looks as nice as the bible page sample in the OP. I made this | |
account here just to ask; which version have you been using, and | |
where did you get it? | |
AnthonBerg wrote 19 hours 16 min ago: | |
I bought it from Typespec :) | |
_emacsomancer_ wrote 23 hours 2 min ago: | |
Curious what you did in FontForge to merge IM Fell Great Primer | |
Italics into Doves Type Regular. (As I'd very much like to use | |
Doves, e.g., for an e-reader font, but I do want to have italics | |
for such purposes.) | |
I made a native attempt in FontForge (just doing 'merge fonts'), | |
which (unsurprisingly) didn't work. | |
AnthonBerg wrote 19 hours 12 min ago: | |
Itâs a bit of a blackout when I try to recall it, haha. I | |
should figure it out and write it up. | |
If itâs useful: As far as I can recall it involved simply | |
changing the font family to match, i.e. âDovesfellâ, and then | |
exporting the regular and the italic. The OS font system then | |
figures out that they | |
belong together. | |
The scale is slightly different and the linespacing too. Did like | |
a 90% rescale on one and 95% on the other? And then there was | |
something to change in the Metrics window to make the linespacing | |
identical. | |
dkga wrote 1 day ago: | |
This font is beautiful, thanks for sharing. | |
stevefolta wrote 1 day ago: | |
I tried looking at code in Mebinac, and was surprised at how strongly | |
it reminded me of old screenshots of Smalltalk. | |
sriram_malhar wrote 1 day ago: | |
This has so much of what I (as an outsider) love about the UK. The love | |
of typography & general design chops, mudlarks, art and design in | |
public life, the spirit of enquiry and adventure and, the presence of | |
people in the bureaucracy and elsewhere who recognize whimsy and put | |
institutional resources behind that pursuit. | |
Animats wrote 1 day ago: | |
The "modernized version", available as a font file, was modernized too | |
much.[1] | |
It doesn't look period. | |
The H.P. Lovecraft Society has some 19th century fonts, if you need | |
them.[2] Those were recovered from old documents. [1] | |
[1]: https://typespec.co.uk/doves-type/ | |
[2]: https://www.hplhs.org/resources.php | |
zettabomb wrote 1 day ago: | |
I'm curious what you mean by not looking "period". The HPLHS fonts | |
frankly seem to just be poor quality, rather than old. If you look at | |
the images of the original type, Doves appears to be quite faithful | |
to the original. Perhaps it's worth noting that we still use | |
typefaces remarkably similar to the Romans, particularly Times New | |
Roman, which despite its many shortcomings retains a "modern" look by | |
virtue of still being in use. | |
vargr616 wrote 1 day ago: | |
Roman type has roots in Italian printing of the late 15th and early | |
16th centuries, but Times New Roman's design has no connection to | |
Rome or to the Romans. | |
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Times_New_Roman | |
CPLX wrote 1 day ago: | |
It was created by the descendants of the Romans, in the same | |
physical location as Ancient Rome, and based on the numerous | |
examples of letters that were still around on Roman buildings. | |
If that is âno connectionâ what exactly would a | |
âconnectionâ look like? | |
WillAdams wrote 1 day ago: | |
Look up the history of how Stanley Morison and Victor Lardent | |
created Times New Roman for _The Times_. | |
The connection you are looking for is covered by Fra. Edward | |
Catich in his books, and carried forward digitally in Carol | |
Twombly's Trajan. | |
zettabomb wrote 1 day ago: | |
I'll admit I'm no typeface expert, but this seems to miss the | |
point. Wikipedia's own page on Roman type [0] says "Roman type | |
was modelled from a European scribal manuscript style of the 15th | |
century, based on the pairing of inscriptional capitals used in | |
ancient Rome with Carolingian minuscules". And visually, there's | |
clearly an influence, though many centuries removed. My point is | |
merely these very old typefaces remain modern looking because we | |
still use similar ones today. | |
[0] | |
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_type | |
garciansmith wrote 1 day ago: | |
The capital letters were indeed inspired by Roman monumental | |
inscriptions. But all the lower case forms were taken from | |
Carolingian designs. Humanists wanted to copy Roman forms to go | |
back to what they saw as writing uncontaminated with medieval | |
influence, but the texts of Roman authors they used to do so | |
were not actually written by Romans but copied by | |
Carolingian-era scribes. It's why its generally much easier for | |
us to read ninth-century texts than, say, earlier (e.g., | |
Merovingian chancery script, yikes) and later scribal hands | |
(e.g., late medieval Gothic). | |
ZeroGravitas wrote 1 day ago: | |
They are intended to be of historically appropriate quality, for | |
use in creating period versimilitude: | |
> Many of these fonts have slightly rough edges or irregular | |
shapes, to capture the feel of old lead type and bygone printing | |
technologies | |
zettabomb wrote 1 day ago: | |
Not all documents from the time period would've had such low | |
quality though, and not everyone would want such quality in a | |
modern document. If you want such an effect, it's always possible | |
to add it later, but it's rather more difficult to remove it if | |
it's baked into the font file. | |
neilv wrote 1 day ago: | |
> âIt is not that unusual to find pieces of type in the river,â | |
Sandy said. âParticularly around Fleet Street, where newspaper | |
typesetters would throw pieces in the water when they couldnât be | |
bothered to put them back in their cases. | |
Some assistant being lazy, or rushing to "finish" a task? | |
Or sorts that broke, or were worn out, and it was normal to toss things | |
into the river? | |
Or a ritual? (Say, toss a sort into the river for the first page an | |
apprentice sets, or when there's a press failure, or for superstition | |
after printing very bad news?) | |
bazoom42 wrote 4 hours 19 min ago: | |
A bit hard to belive they would toss types in the water out of | |
laziness given these types would be relatively expensive and the | |
typesetters would need them to keep their job. | |
The particular case seem to be a deliberate act of sabotage which | |
sound more believable. | |
Throwing worn-out or broken types and other tools in the river would | |
probably be common though. | |
patmorgan23 wrote 16 hours 24 min ago: | |
It's STILL normal for people to litter and toss junk in rivers and | |
culverts | |
timeon wrote 1 day ago: | |
> it was normal to toss things into the river? | |
It was normal. Rivers were used for dumping the garbage. In some | |
places they still are. I know about instances in Europe where people | |
dump their trash in streams behind the hamlet. | |
dhosek wrote 16 hours 12 min ago: | |
One notable instance was âBubbly Creekâ in Chicago where the | |
slaughterhouses dumped so much refuse in a tributary to the Chicago | |
River that the water bubbled from the decay of the trash. The | |
riverbed there is still polluted with toxic chemicals. | |
Piskvorrr wrote 1 day ago: | |
Such as...in the Danube river O_O | |
[1]: https://phys.org/news/2020-09-brown-danube-belgrade-sewers... | |
lostlogin wrote 1 day ago: | |
Semi related - the UK pouring sewage into its waterways has been | |
front page news of late. Itâs up to 3.6 million hours of sewage | |
discharge per year. | |
[1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-62631320 | |
daedalus_f wrote 15 hours 56 min ago: | |
When you say the UK, what you mean is a group of corrupt private | |
companies that find it more convenient and cost friendly to dump | |
raw sewage rather than correctly process it. I'm fairly sure the | |
majority of people in the UK would be in favour of nationalising | |
such companies and instead dumping their executives into the | |
river instead [1] | |
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V-Nwk9E1bs | |
patmorgan23 wrote 16 hours 18 min ago: | |
Franch put a lot of effort into rerouting old swears that dumped | |
into the seine ahead of the up coming Olympics so they could hold | |
events in the river | |
kens wrote 1 day ago: | |
The recovery of the Doves typeface from the Thames was discussed on HN | |
in 2015, so this story goes way back. | |
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9017307 | |
dang wrote 1 day ago: | |
Added to [1] . Thanks! | |
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40271786 | |
beardyw wrote 1 day ago: | |
Yes, very old news. | |
33282334 wrote 1 day ago: | |
hek free | |
starkparker wrote 1 day ago: | |
I remember the earlier story about the disposal and Robert Green's | |
obsession with reviving it back in 2013 in The Economist[1]âat that | |
time, "Intrepid fans have occasionally tried to recover pieces of the | |
type from the river, but no one has ever found any"âso it's good to | |
hear that the story didn't end there. | |
[1] (paywalled; [2] ) | |
[1]: https://www.economist.com/christmas-specials/2013/12/19/the-fi... | |
[2]: https://archive.is/XfK1x | |
rudyfink wrote 1 day ago: | |
That's cool. I admit hearing that story and thinking, "Is that how it | |
happened? could a diver find it?" Apparently, they could! Great work | |
on someone seeing it through. | |
<- back to front page |