There’s something coming on (soon) which is printed and related to the use of database
… but I can’t say what.
… but I can’t say what.
Here are just a few screenshots:
the current cover - that might change slightly in the near future:
.jpeg)
This bit is using the ‘LaPolice’ - a garalde font edited by B&P Foundry and designed by François Rappo - you can see it in deeper details on their website: B&P Foundry. I do really like it - I was planning to use a ‘standard’ Didot Italic but I can’t refrain me… design and the sense it conveys, the name, the document which served to digitalise it, the story (I’ve been assisting Francois Rappo at écal a few years ago) and the History (… well, The King of France!). I do like when there are hidden blocks of sens and alternative stories inside a design, a main story, when there’s other paths to follow. I love this small cap ‘l’ with its serif - I can’t figure out the english name of this very specific serif. As far as I can remember it was the kind of ‘trademark’ of the Imprimerie Nationale foundry, however: I might be wrong.
Here’s the description from the B&P website:
LaPolice is the first revival of an exceptional font produced in exceptional circumstances. Forget copyrights, trademarks: LaPolice is he first hacking of importance in the history of typography! It is the immediate copy of one of the largest typography innovations of the celebrated Romain du Roi created in 1705, which was used as the typeface for the court of Louis the XIV. What did the police do? Nothing.
The creator of this type, Mathieu Malherbe Des Portes, the sole hallmark punch cutter of all of Paris proper, himself had trained Phillippe Granjean, the engraver of the font Romain du Roi. His version carries all of the unique characteristics of the Romain du Roi, such as the new horizontal serifs, sometimes doubled and the secant L. LaPolice is rounder and more dynamic than its original model - it is also more modern and ‘organic’. LaPolice is named after a document named “Traité de la Police”.
François Rappo has designed the revival of LaPolice minutely basing it on the original specimens of the Claude Lamelse’s Foundry in Paris (1742). LaPolice is a contemporary font, dynamic in it’s balance, with a touch of irony in its references of historic details.
Lovely isnt’it? Well written - neat, simple.
To be honest it could cost twice its current price (50€), i wouldn’t mind. I would love to use the LaPolice italic as well, and why not: get the whole family just for the sake of having it… if only there was more than one style.
BUT! The only thing that refrain me from pressing the BUY button is their EULA (End User Licence Agreement) - I am a bit scared of paragraph which could be summed up by “No Derivative Work”. Considering the History of Typography and the typeface LaPolice being a derivative work by itself, Maxime, it’s a joke - no?
Or maybe the police won’t do anything yet again…
November 12th, 2007 at 2:23 am
This morning I was looking for a small utility in my window computer and I stumbled across a folder I like a lot on window PCs it is often in “Program files” and then “Microsoft VS\Common\Tools” or “Microsoft Visual Basic\Common\Tools”.
It is full of strange small programms with funny icons. One of them is called “Font Editor” and allows to edit .fnt files. When I started to play with it I had this error pop-up that made me think of the issue you where discussing at the end of yout blog entry.
It is funny to see encoded here in this small corner the practice of creating fonts by reworking existing ones…
November 19th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
Dear Jérôme.
I wish to clarify certain, arguably scary aspects of a typical typeface eula.
Regarding the “derivative work” thing.
It is actually pretty simple. Typefaces are a very difficult “product” do make business of, as their legal status remains sadly unclear. Basically, typefaces are generally assimilated to softwares, but also bear certain legal aspects assimilated to “designs” and artworks. Additionally, legislations depend on the country where the potential infraction is committed and the jurisprudence is often lacking. Which means that contracts, “licenses” must consider specific (local) legislations too. In this very case, the line that made you jump is maily there for the american market where it is legal to open a font file, rename the font and sell it as such without changing a single point. To avoid this type of cases, we have to protect ourselves in the Eula, it is the only way. Obviously, it is only up to us whereas how it is that we want ton enforce it…
I hope it brings some light.
:)
If I may add, I’d like to emphasize on the fact that we are the first, and so far only foundry that openly encourages file exchange and general use of the fonts by providing freely downloadable trial versions on our website. Time will tell if we are right to do so!
cheers!
December 17th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Hey Max!
I understand the point you bring to light and the fact that copyright protection may in fact and on the long run endanger the original creator.
I just feel a bit weird to read such terms in a contract while we both obviously knows a bit (you, much more than I do) about typeface history and the kind of mutual copying process the big Masters from the past used to develop and enrich the production of typographic styles: the derivation of artistic and cultural work is quite an important historic factor - no?
Another somehow related question: what if I would like to use this font in, let’s say, a single article in a magazine: shall I buy the typeface - me as the graphic designer, me as the journalist? or is it the magazine who should buy it? How many licence would then be required to comply with your licencing system?