Impulse
The Collective Instinct
Play
1:1
Behavior
Luck Has a "RNG" To It
Object
Hasselblad 501CM
In Person
Erik Spiekermann
Methods
Calculated Design
Art
Digitalism
Stortytelling
Writing Without Words
Events
Calendar








Photographs by Jacob Zukerman
Erik Spiekermann has been designing typefaces and information systems since the early 70s. He is a founder of the German mega-firm MetaDesign, and FontShop, the first online distributor of digital fonts. If you’ve ever used typefaces such as Officina or Meta, traveled on Berlin transit, or read the Economist, then you know Spiekermann’s work. And if you saw the 2007 documentary, Helvetica, then you surely remember the self-professed typomaniac: “They [letters] are my friends… Some people look at bottles of wine, or whatever – girls’ bottoms – I get kicks out of looking at type.”
In 2006, Design Within Reach commissioned Spiekermann to design house numbers; a three-dimensional typographic challenge. The result was four carefully-considered choices of number sets, including Tech, which had no diagonal strokes. If letters are his friends, then numbers are difficult, beautiful women that flirt a lot but rarely behave. Spiekermann shared the challenges and history of number design, in person, on April 23, 2008:
"Anybody can design letters, but numbers are hard. Tech was an interesting challenge that I gave myself: to create a typeface that has no diagonals. When you design numbers, you have to do ABC at least. It’s interesting because I realized that what worked for the house numbers obviously doesn’t work for letters. This was going backwards. But numbers and letters are very different; they have different space, different shapes; they come from different places. Figures are actually my favorite part of type design.
It’s always a challenge to give numbers space, because you need to create a complete set where each figure takes up the same amount of room: The 1 has to be as wide as the 0 so that when you make tables they arrange. It’s just another design challenge. I don’t do a lot of designing or drawing myself anymore because there are people who are much quicker than I am, but the numbers I always do myself because I like them so much, even though I probably spend way more time than I should. They’re just too pretty.
With numbers there are more restrictions, and there’s more freedom at the same time. You look at some typefaces and you wonder where the numbers came from. The truth is, they were probably added later. There is a sort of generic set of numbers that can always be integrated into almost any typeface. If you look at the Century School font, for example, that’s the sort of generic – especially American – typeface of the 1800s. It has a specific set of numbers, but you could put those same numbers into almost any other typeface and they wouldn’t look out of place because numbers have their own shapes, different from characters; they’re standing alone anyway. So there’s actually quite a bit of leeway because they only have to conform to each other. The weight has to be kind of the same: the 1 has to look like a 1; the 4 like a 4, but not necessarily like the A or the B. That’s the weird thing.
You can certainly mix the numbers from different types of fonts, and most people won’t even know – because numbers are numbers are numbers. But like anything in design, restrictions are necessary. Otherwise I’d be an artist.
Hey, how the hell do you
Joe Clark - July 19, 2008
Hey, how the hell do you expect us to read this piece when you break it up into four sections?
You’re not doing that to artificially and dishonestly increase pageviews, are you? Because you sure aren’t doing it for readers.
I second Joe’s opinion,
Paul Walker - July 20, 2008
I second Joe’s opinion, (though perhaps not his rather rude sentiment). There’s no advantage for anyone in splitting up articles (if you were to have ads, more impressions would be the only advantage; but (thankfully) you don’t and thus it isn’t). It’s not as though people have an issue with scrolling on web pages; and the sections are too long to solve that issue for the vast majority of people anyway. Otherwise, It’s a very interesting article.
Hey guys, As Paul pointed
Tim - July 20, 2008
Hey guys,
As Paul pointed out, we're not selling ads and therefore don't really care about page views. However, we do care about the reading experience. As you may know, the articles are derived from our print magazine, and some of them are very long. When we designed the site (this specific feature has actually been carried over from the previous site), we felt that scrolling down would be more disruptive to the online reading experience than clicking to the next page. We conducted extensive user testing, and the results confirmed our assumption. But we're not dogmatic about this: We will monitor this very closely going forward and if there's more feedback like yours we may adjust the design, especially for longer pieces.
Thanks again for your feedback and reading design mind.
Tim
I concur with the idea that
Clinton - July 21, 2008
I concur with the idea that scrolling beats clicking. Why would scrolling be disruptive? We already have to scroll past the images just to get to the article. Scrolling down makes me aware that I have everything I need to consume this article in one place. Plus its quicker than waiting for page loads.
ha! so funny because i opted
yael - July 21, 2008
ha! so funny because i opted to scroll down and read the comments before clicking through the "next"... i second clinton's comment.
oh, the horror the horror
Justin - July 21, 2008
Clicking "next" is sooooooooo hard, wah.
Either is disrupting to reading, to some degree, depending on the reader. Then again, so is turning a page. Whichever works best for the majority of readers and the design of the site, run with it.
ahhh...
nk - July 22, 2008
ahhh... twos...designing.
"Auf dem Weg zum Wissen begegnen uns viele Zweifel."
clicking vs scrolling: Scrolling allows one to scan back easier in the article to review something that was skimmed over too fast the first time when a latter mention in an article tells me I need reinforcement. No doubt, it's easier than remembering which page it was on and which page to click back to.
where are the numbers?
Bryan Bedell - July 22, 2008
I prefer scrolling, too, for what it's worth but the real crime here is that there's no images of, or even a link to, the Design Within Reach numbers that are discussed throughout the article.
(they can be found here:)
http://www.dwr.com/category/designers/r-t/eri...
Sadly, only one is still available.
Spiekermann
Brian - July 22, 2008
After seeing Spiekermann in "Helvetica" I could care less about what he has to say. He is a blowhard.
More importantly...
Sam Potts - July 22, 2008
Couldn't you have turned on the heat for the poor guy?
Click the comments
Bob - July 22, 2008
Grrr....this list of comments is getting too long for scrolling. Can't you guys divide it into pages to click thru?
Spiekermann?
Thomas Bland - July 27, 2008
Hey all,
While the presentation of the article has evidently not scored many goals, does anyone have anything to say about the content?
I'm endlessly impressed by the sheer attention to detail of top type designers (I always wonder if they are all extremely anally-retentive as people...). I'm a pretty big fan of most of Spiekermann's typefaces, and I think he's quite a witty and interesting individual.
@Brian - What didn't you like about Spiekermann in Helvetica? For me, he was the highlight of the documentary - I found his obtuse attitude towards traditionalist typography to be hilarious.
Hi, what pen does Mr
manu - July 30, 2008
Hi, what pen does Mr Spiekermann use in the photos 4 and 5?
Conviction
John - July 31, 2008
Spiekermann seems like an assterisk because he has convictions, whether they are popular or not. He is an amazing designer and feels strongly in his own way about design. Most designers today have no idea what they stand for in design and I am not talking about personal aesthetic. He doesn't hate helvetica because he thinks it's boring. He hates helvetica because it makes his gut turn upside down and his blood boil. That's passion, grow a pair.
Great article, I saw a TV
Michael Long - August 3, 2008
Great article, I saw a TV programme called "The Story of One" presented by Terry Jones (Monty Python) about the history of numbers from the beginning up until the renaissance of binary in modern computing; I'm sure it's on YouTube somewhere.
I'm also curious why Brian thinks Spiekermann was a 'blowhard' in Helvetica (and the expression is "couldn't care less", not "could care less").
Count this as another vote for scrolling vs. four pages of clicking.
Scrolling is much better than clicking.
Silas - August 14, 2008
I agree with the scrolling through the article for ease of reading. I read an article on here that was 7 pages long... that was significantly irritating to make note of.
The comment Justin made about page turning being disrupting was interesting. I love reading books and never thought or noticed that page turning was disruptive. Perhaps it is something that I have just acclimatised to - a physical act of turning a page which is always linked to reading. Whereas a mouse click is used for so many different actions - just thinking out loud though. hmmmmm.
I think that reading online and from monitors is still not as pleasant an experience as reading from a book or other forms of printed matter. Why is that?
Any thoughts?
Post new comment