Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Font Identification - What font is this?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Font Identification - What font is this?

    I need help identifying the smaller font that says "Napa Valley" the font that says "JD" is universe, just need to know the smaller font. Thanks a ton in advance!
    Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2017-09-23 at 8.30.27 PM.png
Views:	4
Size:	10.0 KB
ID:	21461

  • #2
    The typeface is Microgramma.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi P-lux and welcome to GDF.

      We ask all new members to read very important links here and here. These explain the rules, how the forum runs and a few inside jokes. No, you haven't done anything wrong, we ask every new member to read them. Your first few posts will be moderated, so don't panic if they don't show up immediately. Enjoy your stay.
      Shop smart. Shop S-Mart.

      Comment


      • #4
        Typeface indeed, B.

        They never mean "font" .. never...

        Comment


        • #5
          Maybe he really wants the font? On my screen it looks like Microgramma 12pt.
          Your mileage may vary.

          Comment


          • #6
            Now that he knows the name of the typeface, he can look for a vendor to sell him a font containing the all the glyphs in the typeface.

            Yeah, the blurring of the difference between the two is my personal pet peeve (that and when "designers" say dpi when what's really meant is ppi or lpi).

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by B View Post
              Now that he knows the name of the typeface, he can look for a vendor to sell him a font containing the all the glyphs in the typeface.

              Yeah, the blurring of the difference between the two is my personal pet peeve (that and when "designers" say dpi when what's really meant is ppi or lpi).
              I’m with you encouraging the proper use of terms. Not sure what your problem is in this case. There are instances where just one of the terms (font or typeface) is applicable and the other one is wrong. But this is not the case here. The logo was created using fonts and asking for an identification of these fonts is perfectly fine.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by typoguru View Post
                The logo was created using fonts and asking for an identification of these fonts is perfectly fine.
                I disagree.

                I could have a copy of a Microgramma font. You could have a copy of the same Microgramma font, but we still have two completely separate fonts. However, we would both have fonts that could be used to reproduce the same typeface.

                Similarly, one designer might have a copy of a font containing Baskerville. Another designer might have a copy of Baskerville in a font from a different foundry. Again, two separate fonts, but one typeface.

                There can be millions of different fonts, all containing the same typeface. A typeface is the name of a particular design of letters, numerals, symbols, etc. A font of that typeface, in digital typography, is the collection of all the digital glyphs in that typeface bundled up into a software file that gives someone the ability to reproduce the typeface.

                Using an analogy, a novel is different from the physical or digital book that contains the novel. An author might sell a million books -- each of them containing the same novel. This is similar to a typeface being different from the digital (or physical) font that makes printing something in that typeface possible. I might sell a thousand fonts -- each of them containing the same typeface.

                So to answer the original poster's question. I don't know what font was used in the image he posted. For all I know it was created using a font on someone's computer in San Francisco. What I do know, however, is that whatever font was used and wherever that font resided, the typeface is Microgramma.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by B View Post

                  Using an analogy, a novel is different from the physical or digital book that contains the novel. An author might sell a million books -- each of them containing the same novel. This is similar to a typeface being different from the digital (or physical) font that makes printing something in that typeface possible. I might sell a thousand fonts -- each of them containing the same typeface.
                  Nope, that analogy is just wrong. Font doesn’t refer to a specific copy of thousands of identical copies being sold. That would be quite silly actually. It refers to a specific version (if there even are different ones). So this is wrong actually:

                  I could have a copy of a Microgramma font. You could have a copy of the same Microgramma font, but we still have two completely separate fonts.
                  If you define font this way (which is possible in theory), you are add odds with how that word is used by everyone else, i.e. your usage is considered wrong.

                  A better analogy is music. There can be a “song”, i.e. lyrics sang with a certain melody. That’s the more abstract thing – similar to “typeface”. And then there can be specific versions of it: Different recordings by the original artist or cover versions from other artists. “Artists” creating “recordings” of a “song”. Like “foundries” creating “fonts” of a “typeface”. That is an analogy that actually works (to a certain extent) and is in line with common usage of the terms.
                  So if someone uploads an MP3 and asks what that is, it is BOTH valid to name just the song (more abstract) or the specific recording (“That’s [songname] from [Artist’s] 2013 live album called [album name]. In the same way, an ID request like in this topic can be answered more abstract (Looks like a Garamond) or specific (That’s probably Adobe Garamond Pro bold). Typeface and font both apply at the same time, because like I said in the previous post, a specific font was being used and it might be possible to identify it. It makes no sense to say “I disagree” to that. It’s not a matter of opinion. It’s factually correct.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Just because everyone else does it, doesn't mean everyone is right and that B is wrong.
                    If you want to argue with a 20+ year newspaper guy that surely knows the historical true meaning of font vs typeface, whatEVer.

                    Think of fonts as lead type kept in a drawer. The Cabinet or 'case' contains the entire typeface of Caslon regular. This photo shows a drawer containing a single font of the Typeface Caslon regular (12pt Caslon regular.) Another drawer would contain maybe the 24pt font of Caslon regular.
                    Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2017-09-28 at 7.37.07 AM.png
Views:	1
Size:	469.2 KB
ID:	21471

                    image credit:https://creativepro.com/confusing-type-terms-part-1/

                    Your computer is a case, as is mine. You might be on a PC, I might be on a Mac. We could have the same typeface called Microgamma, but the font itself is different. Or, we could both be on mac or pc and have typefaces from two different founderies in which case the fonts we are using would be different. Or we could be designing with exactly the same typeface from the same foundry but working in different scales, and again the font we are using is still different.

                    While the meaning of typeface and font have become blurred in the past 15 years or so, it is through sloppiness and laziness, not redefinition.
                    The same holds true for DPI vs PPI.
                    Last edited by PrintDriver; 09-28-2017, 06:50 AM.

                    Comment


                    • B
                      B commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Good example! Even though it's mostly just small, craft printers that still use metal type, the same need for differentiation in terminology still exists in more modern typography.

                      I use various OpenType weights and styles of the typeface Franklin Gothic. Back in the '80s, when I worked at the newspaper, our Triple-I pagination system required proprietary, digitized versions of Franklin Gothic. Way back in my design courses in college, we had a PhotoTypositor that projected the glyphs onto photographic paper.

                      The typeface, Franklin Gothic, is the same in each of these instances, but the fonts are all very different and not interchangeable.

                      The ubiquity of digital typography has lessened the distinction between font and typeface, but even today, it's still important. Some people prefer OpenType fonts, while others prefer TrueType. Old Type 1 Postscript fonts are still common, but the Windows and Mac fonts of the same typeface are incompatible. The font compiled from a sloppily made or pirated knock-off of a typeface will likely be inferior to the mainstream font sold by a reputable foundry. And more recently, a webfont is different from a desktop font and sold separately by distributors.

                      So back to the original question, I don't know what font was used. It could have been a TrueType font, it could have been a free pirated font. It could have been a woff2 web font. It could have been a high-quality OpenType font from URW++. For all I know, the letters were drawn for the occasion in Illustrator or made from rubdown type, with no font being involved.

                      So despite not knowing which, if any, font was used, I'm certain the typeface is Microgramma.

                  • #11
                    If I may . . .

                    The 'Napa Valley' is indeed Microgramma (or possibly Eurostile or other variant) but the 'JD' most certainly is not. I believe this is Huxley Vertical.

                    https://www.linotype.com/150442/huxl...r-product.html

                    BTW I too started as a compositor with metal type and the whole 'typeface or font' debate is old. Today these terms are interchangeable whether we like it or not - English is a living language and useages and meanings change and evolve. If you doubt this or disagree, ask the Flintstones what exactly they mean when they sing 'We'll have a gay old time . . .'
                    Time flies like an arrow - fruit flies like a banana

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      Originally posted by PrintDriver View Post
                      Just because everyone else does it, doesn't mean everyone is right and that B is wrong.
                      Yes, it does actually. It’s how language works.

                      Originally posted by PrintDriver View Post
                      If you want to argue with a 20+ year newspaper guy that surely knows the historical true meaning of font vs typeface, whatEVer.
                      Argument from authority. I am not falling for that. Sorry. And please define “true meaning”. That’s certainly a slippery slope and again at odds with how language works. If there are different historical meanings of a word, what is the “true” meaning? The oldest one? The last you we/you know? The one you like best? How should that even work? (Hint: it doesn’t.) Try to consider that hundreds of words in your own lexicon violate that “true historic meaning” concept.
                      And even though it is irrelevant: Since you tried to play the authority card – I run a printing museum. I really don’t need a lecture on type drawers. ;-)


                      Originally posted by PrintDriver View Post
                      You might be on a PC, I might be on a Mac.
                      You know that this has become meaningless with today’s standard font formats, right?

                      Originally posted by PrintDriver View Post
                      and have typefaces from two different founderies in which case the fonts we are using would be different.
                      Exactly! And that’s why people ask for FONT identification. I already explained that. If the sample uses Adobe Garamond bold, that’s what people want to know! Because that’s what they will then buy on MyFonts.

                      Originally posted by PrintDriver View Post
                      Or we could be designing with exactly the same typeface from the same foundry but working in different scales, and again the font we are using is still different.
                      No. It isn’t with digital type, or even phototypesetting. That’s the whole point. We are not talking about lead/wood type. There is no different font for different type size in desktop publishing. So why do you bring this up? It makes no sense at all for digital type.

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        Originally posted by typoguru View Post

                        Nope, that analogy is just wrong. Font doesn’t refer to a specific copy of thousands of identical copies being sold. That would be quite silly actually. It refers to a specific version (if there even are different ones). So this is wrong actually:

                        If you define font this way (which is possible in theory), you are add odds with how that word is used by everyone else, i.e. your usage is considered wrong.

                        ...It makes no sense to say “I disagree” to that. It’s not a matter of opinion. It’s factually correct.
                        You might self-describe yourself as the "typoguru," but on this matter your supposed "factually correct" opinion is just that -- an opinion. It's also an opinion that is out of step with, at least, historical American usage. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you German? If so, I find it interesting that you're telling me what words mean in my native language and in the profession to which I've dedicated the past 30 years of my life.

                        Decades ago, the following conversation might have been overheard, "John, which typeface would you recommend for this flyer? Last time, the face we used was Garamond, but make sure to use the 12-point pica font instead of the 11-point small-pica font."

                        Today, with digital scalable type, the need for a sharp distinction between font and typeface has declined, as have the definitions. Many designers have seemingly come to prefer the term font for both uses. You, seemingly, have your own definitions. Language changes as needs arise and other decline, which is fine. It's also why I described this whole font vs. typeface thing as my pet peeve instead of labeling it as factually incorrect or incorrect.

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          Originally posted by B View Post

                          You might self-describe yourself as the "typoguru,"
                          I don’t. It’s a project name.

                          Originally posted by B View Post
                          but on this matter your supposed "factually correct" opinion is just that -- an opinion.
                          Yeah, don’t try that. Don’t twist my words. I will notice it and call you out for it. Just go by what I actually say. The “factually correct” phrase had a very specific context. I said twice that the sample in question was created using specific fonts and so people will ask for identification of these specific fonts. That is factually correct. If you don’t think so, just demonstrate it! But don’t twist my words in order to make it LOOK like I am wrong or that my arguments are supposedly “just opinions” when that is not the case. Focus on my arguments, not the my username, the country I am living in or anything like that. Adress the arguments or we won’t get anywhere.

                          "John, which typeface would you recommend for this flyer? Last time, the face we used was Garamond, but make sure to use the 12-point pica font instead of the 11-point small-pica font."
                          Sure. So what? It doesn’t demonstrate what’s wrong with “font identification of digital fonts” that use the same font file for every point size.

                          Comment


                          • #15
                            Originally posted by typoguru View Post
                            ... just demonstrate it! But don’t twist my words in order to make it LOOK like I am wrong or that my arguments are supposedly “just opinions” when that is not the case.
                            I didn't twist your words. Contrary to your beliefs, your words on this subject are nothing but your opinions, as are mine.

                            Sure. So what? It doesn’t demonstrate what’s wrong with “font identification of digital fonts” that use the same font file for every point size.
                            Within the context of the entirety of the preceding discussion, further explanation would be both remedial and redundant.

                            Comment

                            Search

                            Collapse

                            Sponsor

                            Collapse

                            Incredible Stock

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            • Clipping shop
                              Reply to 3D view of a logo
                              Clipping shop
                              sorry to say, I don't think that you know Photoshop pretty well. Because this type of design can be made through Photoshop. Beside this you can google it and can find any other software you like.
                              Today, 11:11 AM
                            • B
                              Reply to Briefs
                              B
                              I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all answer to your question. It depends on the company, its culture, the marketing person, the designer and the project at hand.

                              I oversee both the...
                              Today, 09:50 AM
                            • pers0n
                              Reply to Portfolio usage of work
                              pers0n
                              Well the work would be work I did. For example lets say I designed someone's logo, poster or website and they want me to take it down.
                              Today, 09:25 AM
                            • MinaZee
                              Comment on Logo Feedback
                              MinaZee
                              Thanks Glitchin , and i will.
                              Today, 06:32 AM
                            • Woodenpablo
                              Briefs
                              Woodenpablo
                              What's the general consensus on how to interpret briefs written by a marketing manager or director etc? I was in a meeting at work where I interpreted the brief incorrectly and got a critised for it....
                              Today, 04:43 AM
                            GDF A division of Mediabistro Holdings Adweek | Mediabistro | Clio | Film Expo Group Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy Copyright © 2016 Mediabistro Holdings
                            Working...
                            X