+ 关注
DIN Slab Var RegularVersion 1.00
DIN Slab Var RegularVersion 1.00
DIN Slab Var Regular 字体主要参数
| 字体家族： | DIN Slab Var |
| 字体风格： | |
| 字体版本： | Version 1.00 |
| 书体类型： | |
| 字符数： | 1127 |
| 字形数： | 2187 |
| 字重： | |
| 字宽： | |
| 文字： | |
| 区块： | |
| 来源类型： | |
| 文件格式： | |
| 授权方式： | |
| 字体嵌入许可： |
DIN Slab Var Regular 名称参数
微软 - 英语(美国)
| 版权信息： | Copyright © 2021 Monotype GmbH. All rights reserved. |
| 字体家族名称： | DIN Slab Var |
| 字体子家族名称： | Regular |
| 统一字体标识： | Monotype GmbH:DIN Slab Var:2021:S3:3.0.4 b3105 |
| 字体全名： | DIN Slab Var |
| 版本： | Version 1.00 |
| PostScript名称： | DINSlabVar |
| 商标信息： | FF is a trademark of Monotype GmbH registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and may be registered in certain other jurisdictions. DIN is a trademark of Monotype GmbH registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and may be registered in certain other jurisdictions. |
| 制造商信息： | Monotype GmbH |
| 设计师： | Antonia Cornelius, Albert-Jan Pool |
| 描述： | Typeface Family Name: FF DIN Slab. Library: FontFont Library. Typeface Designer: Antonia Cornelius, Albert-Jan Pool. Typeface Design Year: 2021. Type Style Category: Slab Serif. Number of Weights: 28. Ever since FF DIN’s release in 1995, Albert-Jan Pool planned to extend the small family of five weights. One of the obvious choices in the 1990’s would be to accompany FF DIN with a so-called monospaced aka typewriter version. Typewriters were already outdated at that time, but most readers were still quite familiar with the look-and-feel of the documents written on such machines. Typewriter faces were commonly associated with all sorts of office communication such as letters, forms to be filled out (not to say bureaucracy), hand-outs (be it commercial or at demonstrations) and press-releases. They breath the atmosphere of topical information that is to be taken seriously. As FF DIN is perceived as neutral and objective, it seemed that FF DIN Mono would be offering features that met the demands of the market at that time. Sketches were made but FF DIN Mono lacked the look-and-feel of most typewriter faces. Due to technical restrictions of the typewriter, typefaces used on such machines differ from typefaces used for printing. Whereas in printing types the widths of the letters follow their natural proportions, their main difference with typewriter faces is that the simple construction of the typewriter requires that the width on which each letter is positioned is identical for all. This typically results in the narrow letters ‘I’, ‘i’, ‘j’ and ‘l’ as well as the figure ‘1’ swimming in white space. On the other hand, it causes the wide letters ‘M’, ‘W’, ‘m’ and ‘w’ to look rather cramped. With FF DIN this requirement could be met easily. The most prominent characteristic of typewriter faces is that they usually have linear serifs with a weight that (almost) matches that of the vertical stems. IBM Courier is a typical representative of that style. Now adding serifs to a Sans is not a big thing as such, but because FF DIN is a sans serif typeface, FF DIN Mono would not have any by nature. Or maybe just a few … most sans serif typewriter faces actually do have some: typically, ‘i’, ‘j’ and the other narrow letters mentioned before have serifs. Their task is to fill up the white space, these letters would otherwise be swimming in. Despite all efforts, Albert-Jan Pool decided that FF DIN Mono did not stand out enough to successfully accompany FF DIN, so the project landed in the drawer. The design of additional styles that clearly distinguish themselves from FF DIN, such as FF DIN Round and the development of FF DIN Thin and Extra-Light was favored instead. With hindsight, FF DIN Round and the thin weights enhanced the versatility of the FF DIN family in good manner, but all in all still somewhat restrained. Notably the bolder weights of FF DIN Round showed that it was possible to add clear personality while still keeping the family ties. For the next round it was decided that future extensions should have such qualities. Through the years lettering models presented in DIN 1451 had been adapted for various lettering techniques. The engraving technique used for name plates, identification of devices and machinery, smaller signs and lettering rulers typically shows round or rounded corners — this had already led to DIN Round. Larger lettering was frequently executed using stencils and it is obvious that the prominent bridges preventing the counters (islands in lettering-speak) from dropping out can be used as a design feature rather than accepting them as necessary evil. The decision to design DIN Stencil was thus taken quickly and in the course of historical investigations on industrial lettering another obvious option was explored. At the beginning of the 19th century, two new styles were introduced to the world of printing types. Their visual appearance is strikingly different at first sight, but throughout the early decades of that century, they even shared names such as ‘Egyptian’. What is discussed here is nowadays clearly distinguishable, not only visually but also by their names: Sans Serif and Slab Serif. According to James Mosley, a most recognized expert on the history of (sans serif) typefaces, it did even take until the 1980’s until the term ‘Egyptian’ started to be replaced by the now common term ‘Slab Serif’. Remembering the failed attempt of FF DIN Mono due to its lack of serifs, now, this view on type history reveals the missing piece of the puzzle: Extending the DIN family by an original slab serif design which stands out but fits into the family coherently at once, born by its common history of origin. The newborn FF DIN Slab relies closely on the original FF DIN as Albert-Jan Pool und Antonia Cornelius initially took the sans and added as many serifs as possible. This way, curves, stems and proportions — a typeface’s DNA — of all weights and widths remained the same. But just mounting heavy serifs doesn’t lead to a pleasing result. Typeface design always aims for a balance between black and white. Consequently, the additional black of the serifs necessitates adjustments of the white space to restore the rhythm. Therefore, serifs differ in length depending on the kind of stroke which they terminate. Is it a straight stroke with a serif at the top and bottom like an ‘n’ on the left? Or is there just one serif within the x-height as on the right of the ‘i’? Or is there even a curve like the shoulder of ‘a’ or ‘n’ which causes more space to the following letter? The recipe: the bigger the white space the shorter the black serif. Thus, we subtly compensate for those differentiating white spaces and regain a steady rhythm. However, the bolder the weight it gets more and more troublesome to accommodate all the heavy serifs somewhere in the shrinking white space. So, how do we get more light back to first handle the serifs and second to match again with the original grey value of the sans? Therefore, horizontal strokes were thinned distinctly in the bolder weights. As this is not sufficient for condensed designs, DIN Slab counters faced trouble with sophisticated design solutions — and maxed out the latest font technology for their implementation. The result is a sensitive yet DIN-like sturdy design, which behaves versatilely through the broad design space ranging from thin to black and normal to condensed. If space gets tighter, serifs are shortened, tapered, or even cut off. In this way we are able to focus on the characteristic serifed design without cluttering many letterforms at the expense of legibility. Furthermore, when exploring the width-axis of the variable font, one can observe that the design of terminals (like we have at lowercase letters ‘a’, ‘e’ or ‘g’) adapts to the chosen width: Moving onward to condensed, they change from an open to a closed form, which fits better to the more compact look of the condensed style. FF DIN Slab distinctively carries on its mother’s DNA, speaks the same native language — but with a strong peculiar dialect. It expands the DIN family worthily — independent but integrated — and opens totally new possibilities of uses with the whole DIN family. |
| 供应商网址： | http://www.monotype.com |
| 许可证网址： | http://www.monotype.com |
| 变体PostScript名称前缀： | DINSlabVar |
DIN Slab Var Regular 度量参数
| 每em像素单位： | 2000 | 上标水平字体大小： | 1300 |
| 水平最小值： | -372 | 上标垂直字体大小： | 1200 |
| 垂直最小值： | -534 | 上标水平偏移 | 0 |
| 水平最大值： | 4280 | 上标垂直偏移 | 150 |
| 垂直最大值： | 2306 | 下标水平字体大小： | 1300 |
| Mac风格： | 0 | 下标垂直字体大小： | 1200 |
| 最小可读像素大小： | 7 | 下标水平偏移： | 0 |
| 字体方向Hint： | 2 | 下标垂直偏移： | 700 |
| 升部： | 2082 | 删除线大小： | 76 |
| 降部： | -474 | 删除线位置： | 526 |
| 行间距： | 20 | 字体选择标识： | 256 |
| 最大步进宽度： | 4280 | 字体排印升部： | 1528 |
| 最小左跨距： | -372 | 字体排印降部： | -472 |
| 最小右跨距： | -1236 | 字体排印行间距： | 576 |
| 水平最大宽度： | 4280 | Windows升部： | 2082 |
| 非复合字形最大点： | 146 | Windows降部： | 474 |
| 非复合字形最大轮廓： | 7 | 斜角： | 0 |
| 字重类型： | 300 | 下划线位置： | -244 |
| 字宽类型： | 5 | 下划线厚度： | 76 |
推荐字体
闽公网安备35010202000240号