The Times has given itself a new masthead and a new headline font, art directed by Neville Brody.
You can read about the history of their headline font here.
Strangely, in the article they don't use the word font once. They say 'fount' throughout the whole article.
To check I wasn't being ignorant I looked 'fount' up in the dictionary. Here's what it says, "The English spelling (c. 1980) of the once Americanized (1828) and now ubiquitous 'font'.". I never knew that. Did you?
They've used fount 8 times in the article. Are they being clever dicks? Are they correct? What's going on there?
By clicking here you can see a history of the masthead design. There are 20 in all, over 221 years. This post brought to you via Design Observer.
I had a tutor at college who was a hot metal typesetter and he used to insist that we used fount rather than font. It's a lot easier just to use font though.
Posted by: Keith | Nov 21, 2006 at 20:13
I believe the actual font itself was designed or worked on by a guy called Luke Prowse.
Posted by: Rob Mortimer | Nov 22, 2006 at 16:23