James Souttar <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There's a real dearth of revivals between those of Garamond (d1561)
> and Kis (b1650).
Yes, I agree.
Someone mentioned that one of the Fell Types was digitised -- does
anyone know more? Since they cover a rather wide range (!), it might
or might not be interesting... most of them are to incomplete to do
much with, I'd have thought. You can see some of them in Oxford.
> One type that does have some of the characteristic letterforms of the
> period is Mark van Bronkhorst's 'Celestia Antiqua' (they are also
> *distressed*, but that is another story ;-)
Well, _I'd be distressed if someoe had digitised me and left out half_
of the sorts. Out of sorts, you might say :-)
I never was able to see a full showing before I bought Celestia, and
although I _really_ do like it, I had rather hoped that it would have the
tall-s and friends. Oh well. The ct and st are cute :-)