I admit that I do not have a great understanding of design history, let alone how type faces play into it. Of course I have picked up the basics. But I'm not so sure that I would be able to tell Helfand whether or not Futura was made before the time of Freud's book. A better understanding of the cultural context of type would, I'm sure, change the way I think about using them. However, I am curious to how. I don't know that choosing type faces should be looked at by a historical standpoint. Does when a font was made change its readability? no... nor does it change anything else about the visual make up of the letterform. Yes, fonts made in certain periods may have characteristics specific to that period, but that does not mean that the design must fit within those stereotypes.
Things loose their value when overused. It is true for everything. And because of this article, I have been predisposed to a notion that I should never use Futura. It has been ingrained in my head for over a year now that students using Futura are like students using drugs for shock value in a short story. However, out side of the student world there are some very good stories that are shocking partly because of drug ussage, much in the same way that there are many good designs that use Futura.
I have only recently began to use Futura in some small projects when I get lazy about picking a font.. but really, I'm learning that it has a time and a place.
Instead, I have gone through certain phases of san serif fonts. Gotham, Helvetica (which has been used so much that no one can blame you), Trade, and Universe are a few. All these phases seem to where out after a wile and then I'll seem to develop another san-serif obsession. I should probably stop doing that. Its just that, everytime I discover a new san serif font that I like, its so exciting.
No comments:
Post a Comment