Comments on: Trajan, the movie font

By: Nancy

Nancy — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 03:37:05 +0000

I wasn’t trying to say that the overuse of Trajan is justified. But – as regards film – how many movie title designers get to see the final cut so that they can match film content with a more judicious use of type? How much communication is there between the different areas in any area of media as regards book covers, etc? Your careful matching of content to font, design, etc is exemplary but isn’t it the exception, rather than the rule? Of course, I think that the worse offenders are the romance novels; there’s a very funny site which mocks them and the covers (plus titles) are an absolute hoot!

By: xensen

xensen — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 03:04:02 +0000

If all movies were exactly the same, then the same font would be right for them all. Nothing against Trajan (a nice enough digitizing job by Carol Twombly — can it be almost 20 years ago already?) but can Trajan really be the best typeface for almost every movie? A good designer designs from the inside out — that means watching the film and picking a font that conveys the qualities it’s trying to express.

By: Nancy

Nancy — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:14:06 +0000

I agree on the comment about Papyrus. It’s nice for somethings but not good enough to be so widely used. However, I don’t mind Trajan; the letters have a clean, strong shape which makes them very legible. What fonts do you think would serve the purpose better? Clever vid though.

By: annexensen

annexensen — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:22:14 +0000

The font that I really cannot stand and that is seen everywhere is Papyrus! Please people there are so many better alternatives. And yes, I see Trajan used too much also, but I do rather like it.