Talk:Century type family

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Typography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Very interesting article, but it's confusing. Are the different typefaces named, like Century Schoolbook, all subfamilies of the Century superfamily? Or is it more properly called the Century Expanded superfamily? How about ITC Century - is it a part of the superfamily, or is it the overall umbrella?

Also - is this an exclusive listing of the subfamilies, or just a representative listing?

Very difficult to nail these things down sometimes. Georgia Yankee (talk) 21:28, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Century Family" is probably what Morris Fuller Benton would have called it. These are all "Hot Type", that is to say, type that has been cut and cast in metal. ITC produced first "cold type" (photo-composition) and then "digital type" (computer generated images), neither of which is ACTUAL TYPE. As far as I know, this listing is complete as far as Hot Type goes. So what if someone wants to make some ephemeral digital image and call it a new century "type." Dutchman Schultz (talk) 22:43, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article claims that "Augustea BQ" was Berthold's version of Century Schoolbook. While the two faces do have obvious similarities (but also some differences), Augustea was released in 1905, over a decade before Century Schoolbook, so this seems dubious. The only reference given here is to identifont, which simply indicates the two are similar, so I'd suggest either removing this claim or supporting it with better references which dispute the dates involved. -- AGI — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.206.166 (talk) 11:33, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]