Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers Univers
An Introduction to
Introducing Univers 3
contemporary typefaces.
while also comparing it to other,
explore the characteristics of Univers
of the 20th century. This book will
most influential and popular typefaces
led to Univers becoming one of the
consistent, similar designs. This has
with the goal of forming a family of
one of the first typefaces to be created
designed the typeface Univers. It was
Between 1954 and 1957, Adrian Frutiger
Adrian Frutiger
nial, a modern whose fine serifs are
to advantage in faces such as Centen-
embraced new technology and used it
into no existing type category. He has
wholly comprised of curves and fitting
Breughel is an original face almost
optical character recognition. His 1982
typefaces including OCR-B a type for
Frutiger has created a broad range of
Gill and Johnston types.
sans serif that has been compared to
thaler Linotype in 1976, is a humanistic
for its issue to the trade by Mergen-
known as Roissy but renamed Frutiger
1960’s feel. His airport face, originally
that Univers seemed dated, with a
the Charles de Gaulle Airport at Roissy,
felt, when he came to design a face for
types have Univers as their skeleton he
Although Frutiger has said that all his
designers to create type for film.
and Frutiger—and was one of the first
known being the sans serifs Univers
of many notable faces—the best
since World War II. He is the designer
important type designers to emerge
Adrian Frutiger is one of the most
Adrian Frutiger (pictured left) was one of the most influential type designers of the 20th century.
5
says legibility is solely a matter of habit.1
gothic characters without difficulty and
legibility. He learned to read with
himself is skeptical about theories of
caused legibility problems. Frutiger
neither outdated nor necessarily
that the classical modern face was
earlier his Iridium had demonstrated
in definition. More than ten years
made possible by recent improvements
Attributes of Univers
3p9
4p3
One can see the variation in stroke thickness in Univers when comparing the horizontal and diagonal strokes of the capital Z.
—Adrian Frutiger
“Built up from a geometric basis, the lines must play freely so that the individuals find their own expression and join together in a cohesive structure in word, line, and page.�
7
movement during reading.3
and ‘40s on the mechanics of eye
scientific research done in the 1930s
family followed well-documented
creating a functional and efficient type
dence that Frutiger’s interest in
other typefaces. It is also no coinci-
assessment of visual discrepancies in
and verticals was a response to his
nesses for the horizontal, diagonals,
decision to use different stroke thick-
on the word as a whole.”2 Frutiger’s
shapeless and has a disturbing effect
sented by a perfect circle strikes us as
run, for the vertical ones; an O repre-
character is unacceptable in the long
assumption that “a purely geometric
sans serifs, Frutiger began with the
his study of the limitations of existing
typographical characters. Inspired by
supported by a well-considered set of
approach to type-family design is
case of Univers, this sophisticated
considering the overall system. In the
letterform while simultaneously
be sensitive to the nuances of each
integrated type family, designers must
To achieve the goal of an expansive,
Z
X height
Cap height
“...an O represented by a perfect circle strikes us as shapeless and has a disturbing effect on the word as a whole.�
Ascender
the principles of perception.
made, based on the current knowledge of
form, careful optical adjustments were
maintain the integrity of each letter-
remain distinct from one another. To
important that individual letterforms
satisfying gestalt, he also deemed it
that the assemblage formed a new
letters that fit together so flawlessly
While Frutiger’s goal was to make
O
Diplo
The c is smaller than the o because in open letters the white space achieves greater penetration into the form, thereby appearing larger.
9
allowing for a smooth line flow.4
the overall harmony among letters,
All of these innovations contributed to
more difficult to read than serif type.
the concern that sans-serif type was
provided greater legibility, addressing
increased. Larger x-heights also
typographic norms, and x-heights were
shortened in comparison with existing
Ascenders and descenders were
Descender
o
Baseline
Univers 39 Univers 49 Univers 59 Univers 47 Univers 57 Univers 67 Univers 45 Univers 55 Univers 65 Univers 75 Univers 85 Univers 53 Univers 63 Univers 73 Univers 93
Frutiger originally made 21 fonts for Univers, but has simce expanded to over 40 variaties.
11
nivers 93
nivers 47 nivers 57 nivers 67 nivers 45 nivers 55 nivers 65 nivers 75 nivers 85 nivers 53 nivers 63 nivers 73
Univers
Futura
Gill Sans
Letters in Univers are almost always cut with a horizontal line, as opposed to diagonal or vertical.
treated by each typeface.
and drastic changes in how letters are
will notice how there are both subtle
typefaces, Gill Sans and Futura. One
ed of Univers with two contemporary
Below, there are comparisons present-
competence.5
factual and cool elegance, a rational
great success), Univers expressed a
conspicuous attributes (lending to its
timeless and neutral effect without any
had a general clarity and a modern,
(1958). Whereas Helvetica, for example,
alphabets: Helvetica (1957) and Optima
simultaneously with other successful
Univers font was created almost
SSS
Comparing Typefaces
When looking at the letters side by side, one can see the drastic differences in how the tail of the Q is treated.
Univers
Gill Sans
f 13
While Univers and Futura have different treatments of the ascender and the crossbar, Gill Sans and Univers share many similarities.
Gill Sans
Futura
Univers
Futura
Q QQ
References Bibliography
collections for this designer.
Note: See the list at special
6 http://www.fonts.com
5 http://www.linotype.com
2000)
Publications, 2000. (A&A: Z250.R45
Roy McKelvey, New York: RC
al.]; edited byPhilip B. Meggs and
essays by Carolyn Annand ... [et
Versions of Classic Typefaces,
4 Revival of the Fittest: Digital
Vault)
(A&A: Z250 A2 C364 1995 and
Britain: Lund Humphries, 2002.
Century Type Designers. Great
3 Carter, Sebastian. Twentieth
.K86 2000 and Vault)
Verlag Niggli AG, 2000. (A&A: Z246
and Microaesthetics. Sulgen:
2 Kunz, Willi. Typography: Macro-
1998 and Vault)
Press, 2004. (A&A: Z250.A2 B59
Type. New Haven: Yale University
1 Blackwell, Lewis. 20th-Century
2005
univers.html Accessed No- vember 1,
http://www.linotype.com/7-267-7-13347/
5 Linotype Library GmbH, Available at
4 Ibid, 173.
(New York: RC Publications), 171.
Digital Versions of Classic Typefaces
3 Jennifer Gibson. Revival of the Fittest:
304.
Typeface (Boston: D.R. Godine, 1990),
2 Alexander S. Lawson, Anatomy of a
Press, 1983), 69-70.
of Typefaces. (Poole, Dorset: Blandford
1 Pincus W. Jaspert, The Encyclopaedia
Designed by Michael Avery Typography I Spring 2017 Body Text: Univers, 9pt font size, 14pt leading.