On 2016\06\14 19:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36525214

Crossposted to UTL.

There is an outstanding article at

http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...-johnston-100/

On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 01:20:07 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 2016\06\14 19:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36525214

Crossposted to UTL.

There is an outstanding article at

http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...-johnston-100/

I didn't look at the overlay showing the differences, until after I'd
realised that the slope of the lower part of the "g" was different -
and even that took some time.

On 2016\06\15 01:48, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 01:20:07 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 2016\06\14 19:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36525214

Crossposted to UTL.

There is an outstanding article at

http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...-johnston-100/

I didn't look at the overlay showing the differences, until after I'd
realised that the slope of the lower part of the "g" was different -
and even that took some time.

Is it my imagination or does TfL New Johnston Book, pictured about
halfway down the article, have a capital O which is taller than it is wide?

Basil Jet wrote on 15 Jun 2016 at 02:42 ...
On 2016\06\15 01:48, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 01:20:07 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 2016\06\14 19:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36525214

Crossposted to UTL.

There is an outstanding article at

http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...-johnston-100/

I didn't look at the overlay showing the differences, until after I'd
realised that the slope of the lower part of the "g" was different -
and even that took some time.

Is it my imagination or does TfL New Johnston Book, pictured about
halfway down the article, have a capital O which is taller than it is wide?

Yes, that's true. New Johnston Book, introduced in 2002, is a slightly
condensed and lighter form of New Johnston Light, intended for body text
at 12pt or smaller. One of its features is that the diamond shapes (in
letters i and j, full stop, etc.) have concave curved edges in orer to
improve legibility at small sizes. TfL have not always followed the
rule not to use Book at sizes greater than 12pt. If you can see the
curves on the diamond, the rule has been broken!

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On 15/06/2016 01:20, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\06\14 19:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36525214

Crossposted to UTL.

There is an outstanding article at

http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...-johnston-100/


I like the fact the article is set in the new font.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 15/06/2016 07:24, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 15/06/2016 01:20, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\06\14 19:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36525214

Crossposted to UTL.

There is an outstanding article at

http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...-johnston-100/



I like the fact the article is set in the new font.


Sorry, meant Johnson New font.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In article , (Graeme
Wall) wrote:

On 15/06/2016 07:24, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 15/06/2016 01:20, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\06\14 19:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36525214

Crossposted to UTL.

There is an outstanding article at


http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...d-johnston-100
/

I like the fact the article is set in the new font.

Sorry, meant Johnson New font.

Johnston 100, surely? New Johnston was the 1979 rework.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 15/06/2016 09:19, wrote:
In article , (Graeme
Wall) wrote:

On 15/06/2016 07:24, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 15/06/2016 01:20, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\06\14 19:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36525214

Crossposted to UTL.

There is an outstanding article at


http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...d-johnston-100
/

I like the fact the article is set in the new font.

Sorry, meant Johnson New font.

Johnston 100, surely? New Johnston was the 1979 rework.

No. John Bull added later, in the comments:

"This article is set in New Johnston (i.e. the typeface first created by
Eiichi Kono). TfL were kind enough to grant us a one-off license to use
it on this specific article.

That in itself is an honour, as over its 100 year history you can (quite
literally) count the number of times an ‘official’ version of Johnston
has been sanctioned for use outside of a TfL/LU body on the fingers of
one hand.

Johnston100 is not used anywhere yet. It will debut in July."

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

In article ,
(Robin) wrote:

On 15/06/2016 09:19, wrote:
In article ,
(Graeme Wall) wrote:

On 15/06/2016 07:24, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 15/06/2016 01:20, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\06\14 19:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36525214

Crossposted to UTL.

There is an outstanding article at


http://www.londonreconnections.com/2...d-johnston-100
/

I like the fact the article is set in the new font.

Sorry, meant Johnson New font.

Johnston 100, surely? New Johnston was the 1979 rework.

No. John Bull added later, in the comments:

"This article is set in New Johnston (i.e. the typeface first created
by Eiichi Kono). TfL were kind enough to grant us a one-off license
to use it on this specific article.

That in itself is an honour, as over its 100 year history you can
(quite literally) count the number of times an _official_ version of
Johnston has been sanctioned for use outside of a TfL/LU body on the
fingers of one hand.

Johnston100 is not used anywhere yet. It will debut in July."

Oh, OK. I made a mistake.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote on 16 Jun 2016 at 08:49 ...
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 10:44:07 +0100, Robin wrote:


That in itself is an honour, as over its 100 year history you can (quite
literally) count the number of times an ‘official’ version of Johnston
has been sanctioned for use outside of a TfL/LU body on the fingers of
one hand.

How close was the version sold via the LT Museum ?
Known as P22 or some such.
In have it on a 3- 1/2" floppy disk in a drawer somewhere.
Must get that transfered to something else though it is also on an old
machine that may start up.
As well as the lettering the disk contained symbols of the various
arrows used on LT signs and some tile patterns.

When I purchased it what must be over twenty years ago it claimed to
be true to the original design but I have never studied or have the
intimate knowledge to spot minor differences.

G.Harman

The "P22 Johnston Underground" font is very faithful to the original
Johnston, though I find it doesn't look very good on screen at small
sizes. There seem to be a number of sites offering it as a free
download, not sure how legally. (P22 still sell it on their site.) It
has a few non-Johnston additions such as '#' and '@', the latter based
on the Johnston 'a'.

P22 have also produced a comprehensive set of fonts marketed as
"Underground Pro" (but still crediting Edward Johnston as one of the
three designers). This is an extension of Johnston Underground to cover
six weights from Thin to Heavy, plus other variants though not italic.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)