logoalt Hacker News

virtualritzyesterday at 2:16 PM6 repliesview on HN

I love how all these 'brand' fonts look indistinguishable to an untrained eye and still brain-frying-bordedom-inducingly close to each other to someone like me who actually studied & worked in typography.

Related: https://eidosdesign.substack.com/p/why-every-brand-looks-the...


Replies

bensyversonyesterday at 2:29 PM

It's just the design team running in place. And at a certain scale, it's cheaper to pay a type foundry $100k once, rather than paying Monotype continuous fees for a legacy family.

But as someone who has made multiple neutral sans families, I agree. The launch rhetoric about creating a differentiated visual identity is comical when you look at all the interchangeable corporate sans together.

bonoboTPyesterday at 3:48 PM

Pretty sure it's just the pendulum swinging. Today its all about serious and clean and minimal. Then it will be whimsical and maximalist again. Skinny jeans, baggy jeans. Skeumorphic, flat.

gguncthyesterday at 3:57 PM

The purpose of the brand font is to avoid paying licensing fees. Because the typefaces aren’t protected by copyright it’s usually enough to just have someone go and essentially clone an existing font. The whole thing is an artifact of peculiarities of IP law

show 3 replies
layer8yesterday at 4:05 PM

I think they just misspelled “Bland fonts”.

bigstrat2003yesterday at 6:17 PM

Corporate branding is nothing but an exercise in playing psychological tricks on people. None of it is actually distinct or important. But the silver tongued guys say it is, so people believe it even though it isn't true.

dkuntz2yesterday at 2:57 PM

that's because a ton of them are just off the shelf fonts they had someone make minor changes to