O woe is me!

[annc]

I have to convert an A5 flyer to a 2/3 A4 page ad. No big deal. But all the text is in Souvenir. Every single character. And it's almost all words, with just three small b&w graphics to insert.

This is the second ad for this publication (32 pages, with at least two ads on every page) that uses Souvenir. The other one just had it in Demi for a heading.

I suppose I shouldn't complain. I haven't had to use Souvenir for many years; not since one of my clients changed their logo back in the late nineties.

[Michael Rowley]

Anne:

But all the text is in Souvenir

What's wrong with an Edwardian look? Perhaps they're advertising corsets, sit-up-and beg bicycles, or something.

[Franca]

Souvenir? You poor dear! (Just seizing the opportunity to combine sympathy with rhyme.)

OK, I"ll admit it now because this was back in 1980 when I was young and didn't know any better - I set my first business card in Souvenir. I was breeding and showing Abyssinian cats at the time and compared to what some of the other folks used on their business cards mine was the epitome of good taste. I always felt like a bit of an oddball at the shows because I refused to buy into the kitschy cuteness and elaborate excess. I mean, you're supposed to want people to look at the cats, right?

[djb]

Haven't you heard? Souvenir is the new Helvetica!

[terrie]

>>annc: But all the text is in Souvenir

Ok...I'll be brave and ask...what's the problem with Souvenir??? Just overused or???

Terrie

[ktinkel]

I have to convert an A5 flyer to a 2/3 A4 page ad. No big deal. But all the text is in Souvenir. Every single character. And it's almost all words, with just three small b&w graphics to insert.It could be worse. They could be using Tiffany or Korinna. Or one of the newer typefaces with personality that come out on a monthly basis.

Count your blessings! <g>

[annc]

Anne:

But all the text is in Souvenir

What's wrong with an Edwardian look? Perhaps they're advertising corsets, sit-up-and beg bicycles, or something.I loathe Souvenir with a deep and abiding loathing. The client I had that used Souvenir in their logo also insisted on using it as a text face in their publications.

Edwardian is fine, and suitable in this case. But Souvenir is not.

Ann

[annc]

Souvenir? You poor dear! (Just seizing the opportunity to combine sympathy with rhyme.)

OK, I"ll admit it now because this was back in 1980 when I was young and didn't know any better - I set my first business card in Souvenir. I was breeding and showing Abyssinian cats at the time and compared to what some of the other folks used on their business cards mine was the epitome of good taste. I always felt like a bit of an oddball at the shows because I refused to buy into the kitschy cuteness and elaborate excess. I mean, you're supposed to want people to look at the cats, right?Oh, you're forgiven. And there wouldn't have been much text anyway, on a business card.

[annc]

Haven't you heard? Souvenir is the new Helvetica!The only thing I have against Helvetica is its ubiquitousness. If you're not having a lend of me, then I think I'll hibernate until the fad passes.

[annc]

Ok...I'll be brave and ask...what's the problem with Souvenir??? Just overused or???It's ugly. <g>

[annc]

It could be worse. They could be using Tiffany or Korinna. Or one of the newer typefaces with personality that come out on a monthly basis.

Count your blessings! <g>True. I had to set some Tiffany once. Thank goodness the advertiser never advertised in that publicatiion again. <g>

[djb]

If you're not having a lend of me

I don't know the phrase... Is it something like "Go on, pull the other one. It's got bells on"... ?

If so, then yes... I'm having a lend of you.

;-*

[annc]

I don't know the phrase... Is it something like "Go on, pull the other one. It's got bells on"... ?

If so, then yes... I'm having a lend of you.

;-*Yep, it's a local version of pulling one's leg.

[Shane Stanley]

I don't know the phrase... Is it something like "Go on, pull the other one. It's got bells on"... ?

Pull the other one, it plays 'Jingle Bells'...

Shane

[djb]

My version is lifted from the Terry Pratchett Discworld series.

[Michael Rowley]

Anne:

Edwardian is fine, and suitable in this case. But Souvenir is not.

I've got Souvenir BT, and perhaps your client had nothing quite like it too: perhaps, since the client clearly wanted that sort of thing (why, I cannot imagine), you might have suggested a typeface that was more suitable in your opinion.

Personally, I can't stand that sort that looks as if it is bowed under a great weight, but no doubt in Benton's day it was regarded as modern.

[Michael Rowley]

Anne:

'then I think I'll hibernate until the fad passes

You'll probably have retired by then: it has been popular for 40 years and its popularity shows no sign of abating.

[ktinkel]

… what's the problem with Souvenir??? Just overused or???Making fun of Souvenir started with Frank Romano, founding editor of TypeWorld, a freebie for typesetters and designers in the 1970s and early 80s. He made Souvenir the frequent butt of his humor — and still does, in his column on the back page of the successor publication Electronic Publishing.

And it certainly was overused (you might say that using it at any size below 18 point is overuse, if not downright abuse). Because Souvenir was part of the ITC library and promoted in U&lc, the venerable ITC magazine-cum-catalog that virtually every graphic designer and typesetter received, it got more use than it might have otherwise. (But this was during the disco era, so wretched excess could be expected!)

But the main thing is that Souvenir commits typographic sins:

Cuteness — characters are too distinctive, calling attention to themselves


Poor legibility — e, a, and s are hard to distinguish, and so are some combinations, including ili, ll, and rn; the exaggerated x-height (and short ascenders and descenders) contribute to the problem


Lousy spacing — unnaturally tight letter-spacing, overly large word-spacing dazzle the eye and make text hard to read


Worky (to borrow Marlene’s useful term) — Souvenir needs fussy spacing and extra leading


Inefficient — takes too much space compared to more readable and attractive faces of the same size
Other than that, though, it’s fine. <g>

[annc]

I've got Souvenir BT, and perhaps your client had nothing quite like it too: perhaps, since the client clearly wanted that sort of thing (why, I cannot imagine), you might have suggested a typeface that was more suitable in your opinion.

Personally, I can't stand that sort that looks as if it is bowed under a great weight, but no doubt in Benton's day it was regarded as modern.This is a newsletter, and I rarely get to talk to the advertisers. I just get the copy from the publisher (my client), who tells me to 'set it'. There's really no case in this instance for me to object to his client's taste in typefaces. ;-)

Ann

[annc]

You'll probably have retired by then: it has been popular for 40 years and its popularity shows no sign of abating.Is it really still popular over there? I've only seen the odd display use here in the past 10 years, and one of the major users - a credit union that used it for their logo - stopped using it about five years ago. I thought it had finally disappeared from sight until a week ago, when the first ad turned up. Then the second one arrived, causing this thread.

Ann

[terrie]

>>annc: It's ugly. <g>

LOL!!! I took a quick look at it over at Phil's Fonts (http://www.philsfonts.com/) and I kind of liked it...I can't imagine using it for straight text though...

Terrie

[terrie]

>>kt: Other than that, though, it’s fine. <g>

ROFL!!! I'd never looked at it before and when Ann mentioned it I went to Phil's Fonts (http://www.philsfonts.com/) to take a look at it--you know me and feeding my font habit...'-}}

I couldn't imagine using it in text and I'm glad to see from your comment that I was displaying right thinking on that...'-}}

As to it's cuteness...that's the way I feel about fonts like Arabia (Bockloo)...

Thanks...

Terrie

[ktinkel]

I couldn't imagine using it in text and I'm glad to see from your comment that I was displaying right thinking on that...'-}}Believe it or not, I once inherited an 8-page 3-column newsletter that was printed in 12-point Souvenir Light. The editor just loved it, so I was stuck with it for a while. Left an indelible impression.

As to it's cuteness...that's the way I feel about fonts like Arabia.I think you mean Arnold Böcklin? That was inspired by (?) the work of a Swiss painter (http://www.artunframed.com/images/1bocklin/bocklin64.jpg) of that name around the turn of the last century.

European type foundries went through a mercifully brief spasm of fascination with art nouveau (the English ignored it for the most part), and that was one of the more durable results. (Auriol is another, which was used for some of the Parisian metro entrances — oh, those wacky French!)

It doesn’t seem so much cute to me as extremely dated and, like everything from the art nouveau experiment, overblown — less type than ornament. Some product from 1960s or 70s (maybe the Folkware patterns for historic ethnic clothing?) used Böcklin for its identity. I guess that made a kind of sense, as they had patterns for French peasant’s blouses, that sort of thing.

ITC marketed Souvenir for text. Like most of the ITC fonts of that period, it was marginal at text sizes, but people did use it. Their market was more ad agencies than text designers.

[Michael Rowley]

Anne:

Is it really still popular over there?

I don't know where Helvetica is still popular (or what 'over there' is—do you mean in the northern hemisphere?), but all the 'popularity' lists of fonts still give Helvetica or Helvetica Neue as being among the most popular. BASF, my old employer, has used Helvetica worldwide since 1970 (before that, Bauer Folio was the 'official' font); it has since gone over to Helvetica Neue, which it confirmed was still the company typeface, even though it has recently adopted a new logo.

As sans serif faces go, Helvetica (or H. Neue) is not bad, and it's got countless weights.

[annc]

I don't know where Helvetica is still popular (or what 'over there' is—do you mean in the northern hemisphere?), but all the 'popularity' lists of fonts still give Helvetica or Helvetica Neue as being among the most popular. BASF, my old employer, has used Helvetica worldwide since 1970 (before that, Bauer Folio was the 'official' font); it has since gone over to Helvetica Neue, which it confirmed was still the company typeface, even though it has recently adopted a new logo.

As sans serif faces go, Helvetica (or H. Neue) is not bad, and it's got countless weights.We were talking about Souvenir, at least I was. ;-) And by 'over there', I was referring to the UK.

I have no argument with Helvetica other than overuse, and use Helvetica Neue Condensed for dressage competition results in a paper newsletter I produce every month.

Ann

[ElyseC]

It doesn’t seem so much cute to me as extremely dated and, like everything from the art nouveau experiment, overblown — less type than ornament. Some product from 1960s or 70s (maybe the Folkware patterns for historic ethnic clothing?) used Böcklin for its identity. I guess that made a kind of sense, as they had patterns for French peasant’s blouses, that sort of thing.Didn't Peter Max use it some, too?

[ktinkel]

Didn't Peter Max use it some, too?Böcklin? Hmmm. Don’t remember that, but could be.

[Michael Rowley]

Anne:

The only thing I have against Helvetica is its ubiquitousness. If you're not having a lend of me, then I think I'll hibernate until the fad passes

I quoted you in my message, but you obviously had Souvenir on your mind still, and I didn't know that it had ever been popular since about 1920! I think that the still popular use of Helvetica can hardly be described as a 'fad' though, although I do think that sans serif faces are boring, on the whole.

[ElyseC]

Böcklin? Hmmm. Don’t remember that, but could be.I could be misremembering, but I do seem to remember it in pop art of some stripe.

[terrie]

>>kt: Believe it or not, I once inherited an 8-page 3-column newsletter that was printed in 12-point Souvenir Light. The editor just loved it, so I was stuck with it for a while. Left an indelible impression.

Eww...'-}}

>>I think you mean Arnold Böcklin?

No..."bockloo" is an alternate form of Arabia...

Terrie

[ktinkel]

I think you mean Arnold Böcklin?

No..."bockloo" is an alternate form of Arabia...Hmmm. Neither Arabia (or Bockloo) is an industry font name.
http://desktoppublishingforum.com/images/boecklin.gif
If that is what it looks like, the typeface is Arnold Böcklin (no matter what the font is called). The other names belong to unlicensed copies (i.e., knockoffs or clones).

This is what makes studying type so difficult. Since letter shapes are not subject to copyright in the U.S., but names can be (and usually are) protected by trademark, we end up with a gazillion names for similar fonts.

It may (but may not) relate to quality. There are a few cases where the copy is better (better drawn, better spaced, with better character sets, and so on) than the authorized font. Often, though, the knockoffs are inferior. Consumers have to keep their wits about them … (so what’s new?).

Anyway — is that the typeface? Or we talking about two different things?

[terrie]

>>kt: If that is what it looks like, the typeface is Arnold Böcklin (no matter what the font is called). The other names belong to unlicensed copies (i.e., knockoffs or clones).

That's it!


>>we end up with a gazillion names for similar fonts.

Yeah...someday...if I could figure out how to do it easily, I would like to compare all my fonts to each other and weed out the ones that are the "same" (well...you know what I mean)

>>It may (but may not) relate to quality. There are a few cases where the copy is better (better drawn, better spaced, with better character sets, and so on) than the authorized font. Often, though, the knockoffs are inferior. Consumers have to keep their wits about them … (so what’s new?).

Indeed...I had an interesting experience with that just recently...I was using Papyrus and I tried to pdf the document and it wouldn't embed the font which I thought was odd because I know I've created pdf's before with Papyrus until I remembered that before I'd created the document in Photoshop and saved it as a psd and then placed it in PM or ID and *then* done the pdf...

I chose another font, finished up what I was doing and then went browsing around Phil's Fonts (http://www.philsfonts.com/) and found a number of versions of Papyrus (all name "Papyrus" too). I found one for $22 and after checking the user's agreement which seemed to indicate it could be embedded, downloaded it...

After checking that it could indeed be embedded, I looked at my old font and realized it was "Papyrus LET" and my new one was "Papyrus" but both are by Esselte Letraset with the newly downloaded version being "PapyrusPlain" (vs. "Papyrus LET Plain 1.0" for my other one)...both have a copyright date of 1990.

Terrie

[ktinkel]

Yeah...someday...if I could figure out how to do it easily, I would like to compare all my fonts to each other and weed out the ones that are the "same" (well...you know what I mean)And wouldn’t we all like an easy way to do that! It is fairly easy for the standard pre-DTP fonts — but nearly impossible for new fonts.

It may (but may not) relate to quality.

Indeed...I had an interesting experience with that just recently...I was using Papyrus and I tried to pdf the document and it wouldn't embed the font … then went browsing around Phil's Fonts (http://www.philsfonts.com/) and found a number of versions of Papyrus (all name "Papyrus" too). I found one for $22 and after checking the user's agreement which seemed to indicate it could be embedded, downloaded it...

After checking that it could indeed be embedded, I looked at my old font and realized it was "Papyrus LET" and my new one was "Papyrus" but both are by Esselte Letraset with the newly downloaded version being "PapyrusPlain" (vs. "Papyrus LET Plain 1.0" for my other one)...both have a copyright date of 1990.Makes you want to tear out your hair, right? I would write to Monotype Typography (which ends up owning rights to Letraset, ITC, and Agfa fonts) and complain.

You should not have to buy more than one license for the same font. They complain a lot about users who cheat — call them “pirates” — but this is piracy in the other direction.

[terrie]

>>kt: And wouldn’t we all like an easy way to do that! It is fairly easy for the standard pre-DTP fonts — but nearly impossible for new fonts.

I may be able to do this...when I was answering Don's question about how to choose fonts, I went to the AMP Font Viewer (http://ampsoft.net/utilities/) site and discovered there was an update to their software and a quick look at what was new, indicates that I can use it not just on fonts that are installed but on the directories where I have my fonts stored...

Soooo...when I get a chance (yeah...right), I'm going to try it...


>>Makes you want to tear out your hair, right? I would write to Monotype Typography (which ends up owning rights to Letraset, ITC, and Agfa fonts) and complain.

Not worth the effort at this point...too many other things fighting for my attention...like finding a new long distance provider since Sprint has decided that I'm to pay a monthly fee even if I don't make a long distance call...very annoying!

>>You should not have to buy more than one license for the same font.

Actually...it wasn't until I posted that I realized they were both from the same place...

Terrie

[Franca]

Not worth the effort at this point...too many other things fighting for my attention...like finding a new long distance provider since Sprint has decided that I'm to pay a monthly fee even if I don't make a long distance call...very annoying!Let me know what you find out - last time I researched long distance providers I gave up. There was simply no way to compare pricing - apples and pears. I swear they do that on purpose. Too many different "plans" based on different criteria. Maybe somebody with a better database brain could probably figure out how to "crunch the numbers" but I'd be wasting time I need to spend on other things. I'd just be rolling the dice if I switched providers - I might end up with something better, but I might not, so why bother?

[ElyseC]

Let me know what you find out - last time I researched long distance providers I gave up. There was simply no way to compare pricing - apples and pears. I swear they do that on purpose. Too many different "plans" based on different criteria. Maybe somebody with a better database brain could probably figure out how to "crunch the numbers" but I'd be wasting time I need to spend on other things. I'd just be rolling the dice if I switched providers - I might end up with something better, but I might not, so why bother?Maybe you guys don't do was much calling as I do, but we've been happy with MCI's all-in deal (I forget what they call it) -- $25 for unlimited calling anywhere anytime in the 50 (or is it just 48?) states. I was going to go with a very basic LD plan from our local telco for the second (fax) line, but when I mentioned to the MCI rep that I had two lines and couldn't see paying another $25 for a line I'd rarely call out (or in our case fax out) on, she said that for a mere extra $2 I could have both lines on the same plan. !! Good deal, considering it was going to be over $2/month to have a minimalist plan for the fax line!

[Stephen Owades]

Maybe you guys don't do was much calling as I do, but we've been happy with MCI's all-in deal (I forget what they call it) -- $25 for unlimited calling anywhere anytime in the 50 (or is it just 48?) states. I was going to go with a very basic LD plan from our local telco for the second (fax) line, but when I mentioned to the MCI rep that I had two lines and couldn't see paying another $25 for a line I'd rarely call out (or in our case fax out) on, she said that for a mere extra $2 I could have both lines on the same plan. !! Good deal, considering it was going to be over $2/month to have a minimalist plan for the fax line!
AT&T's unlimited long-distance package will cover any (reasonable) number of phone lines in the same household that are billed together, without any additional fee. In some cases, the local phone company will be cheaper overall for a single line if you buy an all-in-one package (including unlimited long-distance) from them, but for two or more lines it can end up costing less to buy local service from the local company and unlimited long distance from AT&T.

[ElyseC]

AT&T's unlimited long-distance package will cover any (reasonable) number of phone lines in the same household that are billed together, without any additional fee. In some cases, the local phone company will be cheaper overall for a single line if you buy an all-in-one package (including unlimited long-distance) from them, but for two or more lines it can end up costing less to buy local service from the local company and unlimited long distance from AT&T.That's basically what we did, but at the $2 extra charge.

I've kind of leaned in favor of MCI, because my nephew is a decent-ranking executive with them (who worked his way up over many years from the lowly telemarketer position he started out as in high school). However, if the money savings going with AT&T is large enough...

[marlene]

like finding a new long distance provider since Sprint has decided that I'm to pay a monthly fee even if I don't make a long distance call...very annoying!

If you find a long distance provider that doesn't have a monthly fee or minimum, AND doesn't require punching in a zillion numbers (I just want to dial 1 and the phone number, not a long inscrutable code), let me know!

I've been using MCI for years, since they let me group my biz line and home lines together (so at least I was only paying one minimum fee), but I was paying something like $10 a month even if I made no long distance calls at all. (It's a minimum fee, not a service charge, so if I made $10 worth of long distance calls, there was no monthly fee on top of that.)

I called to find out if they had a cheaper deal, and the rep discovered that I was on a very old plan, and was paying something like 20 or 25 cents per minute, in addition to the high monthly minimum charge!

She updated me to a new plan, which is much, much cheaper (don't remember the exact charge, maybe 5 or 6 cents a minute) and has a much lower minimum, something like $5 per month.

So now I pay $5 for nothing instead of $10. <g>

I make most of my long distance calls on my cell phone, for free.

mxh

[ElyseC]

I called to find out if they had a cheaper deal, and the rep discovered that I was on a very old plan, and was paying something like 20 or 25 cents per minute, in addition to the high monthly minimum charge!Don't ya just love how they're very happy to keep secret your need to call and request a new rate? Wireless companies do exactly the same thing. Unless you know to call them, if you hear of a better deal you might assume that all customers are automatically being switched to the new advertised rate/plan. Har! Don't we all wish!

I make most of my long distance calls on my cell phone, for free.I did that out in CA, but got frustrated when I too often couldn't get decent signal strength and had lots of dropped connections. I was fed up with that nonsense and decided to make sure I could talk to people when I wanted to, as long as I wanted to and without shouting or having to ask "are you still there?".

[terrie]

>>franca: Let me know what you find out - last time I researched long distance providers I gave up.

I'm probably only going to check with Verizon since they are my local carrier...but I'll let you know what I find out from them...

Terrie