Project 2; Font Mannerisms
This assignment has been challenging in many ways. First, I have never been formally taught about all the different typography terminology. Due to this fact, it has been a struggle to learn the terminology and apply it to the font I was given; Rockwell. Having said that, it has been very interesting really diving into Rockwell in a way I had never approached typography.
The assignment required us to notate the measurements (ascender height, descender height, cap height, x height, etc.) and map out the differences in a visual format.
This is what I came up with:
The four styles from the Rockwell family seen here are Rockwell Std, light italic, extra bold, and condensed.
As I mapped these fonts out it was brought to my attention that the cap height and the ascender height are the same throughout all of the styles of this font family. Very interesting….I actually mapped them three or four times to make sure I wasn’t missing something and each time I came up with the same result.
The next step in the process was to choose eight words that described my font. The words I chose were:
Regal, Scalable, Durable, Sturdy, Trustworthy, Legible, Welcoming, and Palatable.
All of these words, to me, indicate the true nature of this font as an everlasting font family. A family that can withstand the ever changing machine of typography due to its ability to stand alone as a beautiful typeface but also easily communicate to the masses.
Initial List Final List
After my initial attempt at the different parts of the project, I decided to tweak my work. Starting with the word choices I had selected to describe my font.
Then we went on to label each part of the font. We chose words from our original eight descriptive words we chose for the previous section of the project.
Initial Assesment Final Assesment
After we spent time identifing all of the different elements that make each style so dramatically different in a font family, we got to have some fun! I played around with many different letters before deciding on k, o, A, and X. I worked with a few different options, but felt these were good examples of the dramatic differences between style. I plan to revisit these initital designs and make changes based off the feedback we received in class.
Updated and Finalized Designs:
And on to the next part of the project…BRAINSTORMING! We had to choose two of our eight words and “mind map” as many connotations as we could think of. I literally got out a sheet of paper and went back to the old school ways of mapping my ideas throught liiiitle bitty thought bubbles all over a sheet of paper. I forgot how fun school could be!
The process in motion…
I felt these words were more “visual” and described the font better. Having said that, with the new changes and my new perspective on the typeface, I changed most of my other parts of the project as well.
Updated Mind Maps
Lastly, I completed part 3. The project required us to design a composition that illustrated the essence of one of the words I had used to describe the font. I came up with a BUNCH of options. Here is what I had…
Final Part 3:
The first one is supposed to communicate “CONNECTED” because the slab serifs, when printed small or the kerning or leading is close together, looks like the letters touch each other.
The second one is meant to communicate “SCALABLE”. I chose this word because the font is versatile enough to use in print for a book or printed on a poster.
Here are a few other options that ran through my mind throughout the design process:
The first two are meant to convey security or sturdiness. I tried to play on this idea of the bolder, stronger, beefier letters supporting the delicate, finer ones.
The second two were another attempt at “SCALABLE”. I was trying to find a way to emphasize the differences in sizes. I spent a lot of time playing with ideas to see what I felt worked best.