[HN Gopher] Remnants of a legendary typeface have been rescued f...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Remnants of a legendary typeface have been rescued from the Thames
        
       Author : _emacsomancer_
       Score  : 377 points
       Date   : 2024-05-06 02:27 UTC (20 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (news.artnet.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (news.artnet.com)
        
       | rudyfink wrote:
       | 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.
        
       | starkparker wrote:
       | I remember the earlier story about the disposal and Robert
       | Green's obsession with reviving it back in 2013 in The
       | Economist[1]--at that time, "Intrepid fans have occasionally
       | tried to recover pieces of the type from the river, but no one
       | has ever found any"--so it's good to hear that the story didn't
       | end there.
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.economist.com/christmas-
       | specials/2013/12/19/the-... (paywalled; https://archive.is/XfK1x)
        
       | kens wrote:
       | The recovery of the Doves typeface from the Thames was discussed
       | on HN in 2015, so this story goes way back.
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9017307
        
         | beardyw wrote:
         | Yes, very old news.
        
           | 33282334 wrote:
           | hek free
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Added to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40271786. Thanks!
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | > _"It is not that unusual to find pieces of type in the river,"
       | Sandy said. "Particularly around Fleet Street, where newspaper
       | typesetters would throw pieces in the water when they couldn't 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?)
        
         | timeon wrote:
         | > 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.
        
           | lostlogin wrote:
           | Semi related - the UK pouring sewage into its waterways has
           | been front page news of late. It's up to 3.6 million hours of
           | sewage discharge per year.
           | 
           | https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-62631320
        
             | patmorgan23 wrote:
             | 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
        
             | daedalus_f wrote:
             | 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
        
           | Piskvorrr wrote:
           | Such as...in the Danube river O_O
           | 
           | https://phys.org/news/2020-09-brown-danube-belgrade-
           | sewers-t...
        
           | dhosek wrote:
           | One notable instance was "Bubbly Creek" 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.
        
         | patmorgan23 wrote:
         | It's STILL normal for people to litter and toss junk in rivers
         | and culverts
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | 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] https://typespec.co.uk/doves-type/
       | 
       | [2] https://www.hplhs.org/resources.php
        
         | zettabomb wrote:
         | 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.
        
           | ZeroGravitas wrote:
           | 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:
             | 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.
        
           | vargr616 wrote:
           | 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.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Times_New_Roman
        
             | zettabomb wrote:
             | 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] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_type
        
               | garciansmith wrote:
               | 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).
        
             | CPLX wrote:
             | 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 "no connection" what exactly would a
             | "connection" look like?
        
               | WillAdams wrote:
               | 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.
        
       | sriram_malhar wrote:
       | 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.
        
       | unraveller wrote:
       | 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
        
         | stevefolta wrote:
         | I tried looking at code in Mebinac, and was surprised at how
         | strongly it reminded me of old screenshots of Smalltalk.
        
         | dkga wrote:
         | This font is beautiful, thanks for sharing.
        
         | AnthonBerg wrote:
         | Thanks!, hadn't come across Mebinac. It's quite good!
         | 
         | I'm also a big fan of Igino Marini's 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._ --
         | https://web.archive.org/web/20240128075552/https://iginomari...
         | 
         | The IM Fell fonts themselves seem to live on Google Fonts these
         | days: https://fonts.google.com/?query=Igino+Marini
         | 
         | 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: https://apps.apple.com/is/app/ifont-find-
         | install-any-font/id...
         | 
         | 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: https://int10h.org/oldschool-pc-fonts/
         | 
         | 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!:
         | https://fontforge.org/en-US/
         | 
         | (FontForge can autogenerate italics for any font. If you're
         | bored, I suggest loading up the classic VGA font and pressing
         | the _ITALICIZE_ button on ot. It's... interesting!)
         | 
         | In general, on Windows I much prefer MacType's fomt rendering:
         | https://www.mactype.net ... it's kind of amazing that this kind
         | of surgery is even possible.
        
           | _emacsomancer_ wrote:
           | 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:
             | It's a bit of a blackout when I try to recall it, haha. I
             | should figure it out and write it up.
             | 
             | If it's useful: As far as I can recall it involved simply
             | changing the font family to match, i.e. "Dovesfell", 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.
        
           | dovesseeker wrote:
           | 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:
             | I bought it from Typespec :)
        
         | criddell wrote:
         | 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:
           | https://wakamaifondue.com/
        
         | _emacsomancer_ wrote:
         | A discussion of other digitisations:
         | https://web.archive.org/web/20220705070449/http://luc.devroy...
        
         | marviel wrote:
         | On "unauthorized" -- how would this not be public domain at
         | this point?
        
           | tasuki wrote:
           | Unauthorized doesn't mean it isn't in the public domain. It
           | means there was no authorization.
        
             | marviel wrote:
             | Certainly -- I'm just not sure who would "authorize" it in
             | the first place.
        
           | wizzwizz4 wrote:
           | Copyright doesn't apply to typefaces. https://en.wikipedia.or
           | g/wiki/Intellectual_property_protecti...
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related. Others? I think there were others.
       | 
       |  _The lost Doves Press typeface and its revival (2015)_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20791125 - Aug 2019 (9
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _How the Doves Type Was Nearly Lost_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12476579 - Sept 2016 (44
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _One man 's obsession with rediscovering the Doves typeface_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9951869 - July 2015 (32
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Lost typeface printing blocks found in river Thames_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9017307 - Feb 2015 (22
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _The fight over the Doves: A legendary typeface gets a second
       | life_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6964013 - Dec 2013
       | (12 comments)
        
         | proactivesvcs wrote:
         | There were many more, but these were all dang could find after
         | pg threw them in the river.
        
           | jprd wrote:
           | 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.
        
       | raldi wrote:
       | I'm 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:
         | https://youtu.be/e8harWbZN6U?si=4D5ZDCn2WLlciy5T&t=1002
        
       | riwsky wrote:
       | Thames New Roman
        
         | surfingdino wrote:
         | You win the Internet today :-)
        
           | rayiner wrote:
           | Whoever downvoted this has no soul.
        
             | Jerrrry wrote:
             | >pun            >you win the internet            >downvote
             | 
             | It is against the rules to tell you which rule you are
             | breaking. hint hint.
        
             | fuzzfactor wrote:
             | Don't disrespect the downvote-a-bot !
             | 
             | What's you expecting a soul for?
        
       | morrbo wrote:
       | 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:
         | Maybe drop Robert Green (the man behind this article) an email
         | on: https://typespec.co.uk/custom-font-services/
        
           | bradrn wrote:
           | Klim Type Foundry [1] may also be worth a contact -- they've
           | been inspired by woodcut type before (e.g. [2] [3]), so I
           | wonder if they might be interested in knowing about this.
           | 
           | [1] https://klim.co.nz/
           | 
           | [2] https://klim.co.nz/blog/maelstrom-design-information/
           | 
           | [3] https://klim.co.nz/blog/manuka-design-information/
        
       | JNRowe wrote:
       | 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 Crossrail4 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embanking_of_the_tidal_Thames
       | 
       | 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thames_Embankment - Both the
       | "home" of the type in Hammersmith and Fleet were the targets of
       | embankment work in the 19th century
       | 
       | 3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_Bridge_and_Golden_J...
       | 
       | 4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossrail
        
         | lostlogin wrote:
         | On a trip to London and having heard of mudlarking, I walked in
         | one of the 'beaches'. 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.
        
       | baerrie wrote:
       | Nicola White documents here interesting mudlarking adventures on
       | youtube, I recommend it!
       | https://youtu.be/rVxncipNvvY?si=1DGluOHT8T5fRNfE
        
       | komali2 wrote:
       | I'm wryly curious why fonts are among the odd things that really
       | get the goat of us turbo-nerds on forums like HN.
        
         | mihaic wrote:
         | 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:
           | The centuries-old artistry of mass reproduction of thought
           | has many wonderful minutiae!, as high technology often does.
        
         | Biganon wrote:
         | 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:
           | Agreed, same reason the Monaspace font 1.1 release made news:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40267120
        
       | mihaic wrote:
       | 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:
         | Not really. Jenson's typeface (modern revivals include
         | Montype's 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.
        
       | rawling wrote:
       | 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:
         | 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:
           | 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:
             | 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.
        
               | rozab wrote:
               | 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.
        
               | dhosek wrote:
               | The problem is not the ink traps but the lack of optical
               | scaling.
        
               | dhosek wrote:
               | It's also a matter of printing technology, letterpress,
               | vs offset. The latter tends to have less ink spread. It's
               | 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 don't digitize well
               | (digital Optima is a poor approximation of the original
               | analog letterforms).
        
       | wrp wrote:
       | There was also a revival of the Doves type made by Torbjorn
       | 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.
       | 
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20121127135748/home1.swipnet.se/...
        
       | KaiserPro wrote:
       | You might also like "Zilvertype" which is from the dutch font
       | school of roughly the same time.
       | https://www.alphabettes.org/zilvertype/
        
       | TehCorwiz wrote:
       | Again? I swear this happened about a decade ago. Yeah, here it
       | is: https://metro.co.uk/2015/03/15/lost-typeface-rediscovered-
       | al...
       | 
       | EDIT: It's the same typeface.
        
       | pimlottc wrote:
       | There's a great episode of the Futility Closet podcast about the
       | Doves Type and the dispute that lead to it being dumped into the
       | Thames:
       | 
       | https://www.futilitycloset.com/2017/09/04/podcast-episode-16...
        
       | aidenn0 wrote:
       | Thames Old Roman?
        
       | ada1981 wrote:
       | Wild they didn't include an example of the actual typeface in the
       | article.
       | 
       | Also, I'm curious how there were 500,000 pieces in the typeface.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-06 23:00 UTC)