Talk:Jan Tschichold

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Transit or Transat?[edit]

I looked for the Transit typeface out of the Wikipedia, and found no trace of it; there is a typeface called Transat instead. Is that a typo, or does the Transit exist? (talk) 15:28, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]


i've read on the &cond website that he was imprisoned for creating fonts that made Germans sad (or something like that). is that true? can anybody confirm it?

He was charged with cultural Bolshevism and "un-Germanic typography" as was Paul Renner, designer of the Futura typeface. CApitol3 20:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tschichold image/portrait[edit]

Several weeks ago I replaced the portrait of Tschichold which was combined with his name and life dates. The reason being two-fold: the style is very much unlike Tschichold: shadow multicolored typography, a two-color frame device around the photo, upper and lowercase name reading up off the page, the upper and lowercase he would have done, but the dates are then set in lining (non-old style) figures which Tschichold considered appropriate only with uppercase text or in use of sans serif. The assymetric layout of that composition was more typical of Tschichold's earlier work when he embraced sans-serif. But once he embraced serif (that piece did use a Tschichold face, Sabon) he did not use assymetrical layout or multi-directional reading paths. Probably more important is that in the context of being about a typographer with very specific (rigid?) ideas about typography the insertion of a piece not by him or one of his contemporaries would be considered "new research" which wikipedia prohibits. A piece like that can be created to illustrate an article, but in this context it should not be. To reconstruct an illustration of the Van de Graaf canon would not be considered new research. But a personal expression that contains design content suggests a possible academic or historical provenance the piece doesn't have.CApitol3 22:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"This artisan background and calligraphic training set him apart from almost all other noted typographers of the time, since they had inevitably trained in architecture or the fine arts. It also may help explain why he never worked with handmade papers and custom fonts as many typographers did, preferring instead to use stock fonts on a careful choice from commercial paper stocks."

I don't understand how the conclusion in sentence two has been reached. If anything, one would expect an individual with hands-on training to be more likely to use handmade papers and custom fonts because he could easily create them. Elaboration is needed.

Wikipediatricia777 (talk) 23:43, 14 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jan Tschichold. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:55, 21 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Custom Typefaces" – Does this mean "Calligraphy"?[edit]

The second paragraph of the LIFE section states that JT used "stock" typefaces rather than "custom."

What does this mean?? "Stock" to whom? Publishers? Ad houses? Type foundries? Because type is an industrial product with many steps leading to type laid in a case, there are no "custom" typefaces. "Custom" suggests calligraphy, or hand lettering done for a specific job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HotType918 (talkcontribs) 14:27, 31 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]