Attention Please! Fonts In Use will be closing for a few minutes of essential maintenance on Tuesday the 15th of July at 2pm Berlin Time
An independent archive of typography.
Topics
Formats
Typefaces

Smithsonian magazine table of contents (1989 & 2013)

Contributed by Chris Purcell on Mar 19th, 2013. Artwork published in .

7 Comments on “Smithsonian magazine table of contents (1989 & 2013)”

  1. The new logo is heinously spaced. It appears that the designer, in tightening the overall tracking, took it upon himself to make some individual adjustments (or relied on Adobe Optical Spacing?) when he should have trusted Hoefler Titling’s built-in kerning:

  2. chris purcell says:
    Mar 19th, 2013 4:52 am

    I think it’s just the (heinously kerned) cover masthead reduced to about 33%, w no tracking or weight adjustments for the change in size.

    Very effective demo, Stephen!

  3. That logo is surprisingly poorly kerned, considering the institution it represents. However, it’s a little tough to compare it to a screen sample like that. Though I’m sure H&FJ have done everything they can to reproduce their metrics as faithfully as possible in such a preview, even that sample has problems (Sm, so). And though I too would typically trust H&FJ’s built-in metrics, I don’t think InDesign’s optical spacing deserves such a bad rap; in my experience, it actually does a better job than the metrics in a surprising number of typefaces I’ve used. It’s a great defense against the work done by designers who are (sadly, often far) less rigorous than the craftspeople at H&FJ.

  4. Jaroslav Tvrdon says:
    Mar 19th, 2013 3:53 pm

    I think it was used this way intentionally because this kind of spacing makes more interesting (emotional, eye-catching, upsetting.. :) logo. It is an attemt to make the same type of logo with serifed type like M. Vignelli does with sanserif Helvetica. Why not. 

  5. m smith says:
    Mar 22nd, 2013 10:40 am

    Why not? Because it looks amateur and ungainly. Even if poor kerning was the intent, it does not suit or honor the content. Sad to see what was clearly a beautifully designed magazine become messy and degraded.

  6. That’s definitely not Adobe’s optical kerning. It has its flaws, but it would not produce that mess.

  7. Well guys, looks like we’ve found this information for Peggs:

Post a comment