{"id":634,"date":"2012-04-27T05:45:45","date_gmt":"2012-04-27T05:45:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.oert.org\/?p=634"},"modified":"2023-01-28T00:30:05","modified_gmt":"2023-01-28T00:30:05","slug":"typographic-classification","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/typographic-classification\/","title":{"rendered":"Typographic classification"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
Elaboraci\u00f3n: Natalia Fern\u00e1ndez<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/span>  Art\u00edculo en proceso de traducci\u00f3n <\/div>\n\n\n\n

Typographic classification<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

Those ambiguities, redundancies and deficiencies remind us of those Dr Fanz Kuhn attributes to a certain Chinese encyclopedia called Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge\u00b4s Taxonomy. In its remote pages it is written that the animals are divided into: (a) belonging to the emperor, (b) embalmed, (c) tame, (d) sucking pigs, (e) sirens, (f) fabulous, (g) stray dogs, (h) included in the present classification, (i) frenzied, (j) innumerable, (k) drawn with a very fine camelhair brush, (l) et cetera, (m) having just broken the water pitcher, (n) that from a long way off look like flies.<\/p>\nJorge Luis Borges. \u201cEl idioma anal\u00edtico de John Wilkins\u201d, en Otras Inquisiciones<\/em>,\u00a0Buenos Aires, Emec\u00e9, 1996.<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

from giving us several typographic , stylistic, historic, and cultural references.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Classification systems based on historic criteria are useful to analyze typography designed up to the mid-20th century. It is useful to know them in order to understand the influence the merging of new technologies and the better use of ancient knowledge had on the evolution of typographic design, apart from being a great tool to strengthen historic associations or for the search of families in catalogues. There have been many attempts to establish a classification system capable of arranging the existing typographic styles. The main ones are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1921 <\/strong>Francis Thibaudeau. He organizes his classification in 4 styles, basing it in the contrast of strokes and stems terminals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1954 <\/strong>Maximilien Vox. He proposes a historic classification, this is one of the best known models. It includes 9 styles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1958 <\/strong>Aldo Novarese. Based on the Thibadeau system, he establishes 10 styles differentiated depending on the morphology of terminals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1962<\/strong> DIN 16518-ATypI (Association Typographique Internationale). It adopts and completes the system developed by Vox. (10 styles)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1963<\/strong> Giuseppe Pellitieri. He establishes a morphologic classification of 10 styles, based on the differences between strokes and terminals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1965<\/strong> British Standards Institution (bs 2961 system) (9 styles)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1979<\/strong> Jean Alessandrini. He also bases his classification on morphologic characteristics. He establishes 15 different styles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1992<\/strong> Christopher Perfect. He adopts a historic criterion to establish 7 styles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1997<\/strong> Robert Bringhurst. He relates typographic styles to main artistic movements. He defines 8 styles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are many ways to classify and many different classification systems, but regardless of the system we adopt, we have to know which things to analyze in typeface families in order to decide how to group them or how to separate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

XVth Century<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

1450 <\/strong>Johannes Gutenberg, in Germany, uses for the first time the movable type printing. The first lead types tried to imitate the calligraphy with which handwritten books were written.
1470. <\/strong>In Venice, type carvers took humanist writings as a model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1470 Roman or Venetian Humanist<\/h4>\n\n\n\n