Depository Of Handwriting And Calligraphy Styles and Discussion

[waterproof]

This style of Copperplate(or more exactly,Spencerian) is called the "Needle Stitch Script"(as showed in the picture).

Needle-Stich script is modified English Roundhand (Copperplate). In Joe Vitolo's case, it is modified Engraver's script.

 

It has nothing to do with Spencerian script which is entirely different.

 

Ken

 

Maybe you are wrong this time,Ken.I recommend you to have a look at WHAT I had posted above:http://www.iampeth.com/books/sull_volume_I/sull_volume_I_page24.html

And you will see the sentence which reads"A form of Spencerian in which short interrupted dashes of shading are added to a unweighted script...."

So, you can't say that it has nothing to do with Spencerian.

 

I would say it has to do with neither, exclusively, but is rather a process which can be applied to any shaded hand. The example you posted, is, as Ken correctly points out, based on Copperplate, whereas the example on the page you cited is Spencerian.

 

Yeah,to be exactly,NSS itself is not a style of script,but a technique which can be applied to any shade styles.

[caliken]

Sorry maybe you misunderstood me.

Your piece of Needle Stitch Script is based on English Roundhand,and Joe Vitolo's is in Engraver's Script, those are right, and I think I didn't say words denying these facts.What I want to tell is that from the very beginning, NSS is used to described the special style of Spencerian originated by past master Francis B. Courtney.

So when you said NSS has nothing to do with Spencerian, I really can't agree with you.

Can these explainations help?

waterproof,

 

You decribed my example of Needle Stitch Script as Spencerian, which it's not.

 

My only concern was in setting the record straight, which I've done.

 

Having said that, no apology is necessary and I'm grateful to you, and to Mickey, for your enlightenment as to the origins of this interesting by-product. You're never too old to learn!

 

Ken

Edited August 5, 2012 by caliken

[caliken]

Niccolo Niccoli's Formal Script #103

 

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/niccolialphabet450.jpg

Edited August 5, 2012 by caliken

[caliken]

Niccolo Niccoli's Formal Script

 

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/Combinedscripts040812600.jpg

 

This is an attempt to re-create a Formal Script by Niccolo Niccoli (c1363 - 1437).

 

He is credited with having invented Italic Script and this formal script which dates c1405 - 1415,

may have been a forerunner, or an additional script which he employed concurrently.

 

Due to age, this example isn’t as clear as it might be, but it is easy to recognise the beauty of

the underlying lettering. This style is basically Carolingian and as many letters and the

numerals are missing, I’ve used contemporary examples to complete the alphabet.

 

You may notice that Niccoli used both versions of the letter s. I wrote both in the alphabet, but

used only the modern one, in the text.

 

Strangely, the minuscule h is a throwback to the Uncial script of an earlier age, as the second

stroke curves inwards. This is at odds with the rest of the alphabet.

 

Although this is heavy lettering (the x height is only three pen widths), the letters aspect is broad

and the inter-line spacing is very generous, which all balances beautifully.

 

I am grateful to Hdoug for having posted this fragment.

 

Ken

Edited August 5, 2012 by caliken

[HDoug]

Thanks so much for recreating the Niccoli script -- really wonderful!

 

I do have a question: concerning the long s and f, there is a characteristic "bump" that is present in many scripts. When (in terms of stroke order) and how was this rendered and why? Just wondering because it seems rather mysterious to me.

 

Doug

[caliken]

Thanks so much for recreating the Niccoli script -- really wonderful!

 

I do have a question: concerning the long s and f, there is a characteristic "bump" that is present in many scripts. When (in terms of stroke order) and how was this rendered and why? Just wondering because it seems rather mysterious to me.

 

Doug

It's mysterious to me, as well!

 

I wrote both s and f as two stroke letters - adding in the 'bump' as a second downstroke.

 

I've no idea why it was done this way. Perhaps some erudite reader can enlighten us (?)

 

Ken

Edited August 5, 2012 by caliken

[Columba Livia]

French Roundhand - Ronde #107:

 

http://i.imgur.com/FPIZz.jpg

 

Source: Prof. Giovanni Tonso's "Modelli Di Calligrafia", first published in 1898.

 

I have scanned the plates and they are here

Edited August 6, 2012 by Columba Livia

[caliken]

Thanks for posting this beautiful exemplar, Columba Livia.

 

If you have time to edit, can I suggest that, as in previous exemplars, you add the post number #107 to the title, so that it can be included in the index?

 

Ken

[tdzb36]

English Roundhand (Copperplate) #2 Hi caliken，I visited your web site，I saw a picture of Penmanship is very beautiful，Please ask me How this font to write？Is it need special tools to finish it？

 

This style of Copperplate(or more exactly,Spencerian) is called the "Needle Stitch Script"(as showed in the picture). Only a flexible pen is needed.Following the basic principle of executing Copperplate, and "break" the letter at about an half of the X-height,you can also do this.

 

 

For more information about this style,visit IAMPETH at

http://www.iampeth.com/books/sull_volume_I/sull_volume_I_page24.html

 

or to see this video by Dr.Joe Vitolo:

http://www.iampeth.com/videos/pages/vitolo_needle_stitch_script.htm

 

 

Caliken！Thank you for your answer， It will be very helpful for me！Thank you very much! :roflmho:

[Columba Livia]

Gotica Moderna ("Modern Gothic"), #110

 

http://i.imgur.com/n3xEt.jpg

 

Source: Prof. Giovanni Tonso's "Modelli Di Calligrafia", first published in 1898.

 

I have scanned the plates giving instructions for Gotica Moderna/modern Gothic and they are here

Edited August 6, 2012 by Columba Livia

[caliken]

Neugebauer's Fraktur Script #111

 

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/NeugebauersFraktur450.jpg

[caliken]

Post #111 is my version of a personalised Fraktur Script devised by the Austrian calligrapher, Friedrich Neugebauer. It was written with a Rotring Artpen fitted with a 2.7 edged nib and filled with Aurora black ink.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Ken Fraser

[caliken]

Columba Livia,

 

Gotica Moderna #110

 

Your linked example is quite fascinating. It's unusual to see so many secondary letter forms within one particular style exemplar, and to see them used within the same piece of text shows a freedom not usually fouund within Gothic scripts.

 

Thanks for posting this beautiful example.

 

Is much known about Prof. Giovanni Tonso? I am not familiar with the name.

 

Ken

[Columba Livia]

Is much known about Prof. Giovanni Tonso? I am not familiar with the name.

 

I don't know anything about him, except that he was publishing from 1899 to 1950. What he was publishing was similar to the other Italian calligraphers of the time in terms of the variety of scripts presented.

 

I have scanned in the whole set of 33 plates here

[josiah]

I do have a question: concerning the long s and f, there is a characteristic "bump" that is present in many scripts. When (in terms of stroke order) and how was this rendered and why? Just wondering because it seems rather mysterious to me.

It's mysterious to me, as well!

 

I wrote both s and f as two stroke letters - adding in the 'bump' as a second downstroke.

 

I've no idea why it was done this way. Perhaps some erudite reader can enlighten us (?)

 

As I understand it[1], the history of the long s looks something like the following; I couldn't find anything concise on the internet, so I slapped together (it's a little sloppy, but see below). Except for the first and penultimate examples, all of these were done in one stroke (bottom left to top right). In order, these are a simplified Roman majuscule S, a Roman cursive s, a lazier Roman cursive s, a pair of esses written in a half-uncial or Carolingian fashion (the second in particular with the rounded bump); in the second row, I have tried to copy (from foggy memory) an old German cursive majuscule S and minuscule terminal s, a multi-stroke humanist s, and an Italic s.[2] I included the bottom row because they all demonstrate the single-stroke history of the old Roman cursive s—even the humanist s that gave myself four strokes to complete: the hook or bump is like a vestigial tail (the bottom bow of the round s), which is generally only absent in a long s if that tail is a descender (as in the Italic example).

 

http://troglophonic.org/calligraphy/LongS.jpg

 

In my searching, I did find a few awesome pages devoted to the long s. The two I found most useful:

 

Long and Short of Letter S is fantastic!

 

Medieval Writing's History of S is pretty good, but since the esses are presented out of context, it's hard to tell if the hookless examples descend below the writing line. I will grumble to myself for days, I tell you!

 

[1] I am neither a historian nor a scientist, and my understanding is easily prone to error. Please forgive me if I'm inaccurate, but please also correct me. I'm pretty curious about this sort of thing and would rather be correct than right.

 

[2] My foggy memory may be untrustworthy, but I think most long esses I've seen in Italic exemplars do not have descenders, but they do have a hook in the middle. In my estimation, the long s with a descender seems to have been more popular in America; English speakers, in general, didn't seem to care about the medial/terminal distinction that the Germans did, and Americans seemed to enjoy the lavish long s that takes up as much ink as the rest of the word combined ;-)

[josiah]

Oh, I just remembered! Jacqueline Svaren had a couple things to say about the long s:

 

A brief historical note:

http://troglophonic.org/calligraphy/history.png

 

Half Uncial:

http://troglophonic.org/calligraphy/halfuncial.png

 

Carolingian:

http://troglophonic.org/calligraphy/carolingian.png

 

Please excuse the poor photographic quality. My phone's camera isn't very good. But these are from Written Letters: 33 Alphabets for Calligraphers, Expanded & Revised, Jacqueline Svaren, ©1986.

[caliken]

I have scanned in the whole set of 33 plates here

Thanks for posting these beautiful examples.

 

Ken

[caliken]

josiah,

 

Thanks for the very comprehensive explanation of the long leter 's'.

There's enough reading here, to keep me going for days!

 

Ken

[HDoug]

As I understand it[1], the history of the long s looks something like the following; I couldn't find anything concise on the internet, so I slapped together (it's a little sloppy, but see below). Except for the first and penultimate examples, all of these were done in one stroke (bottom left to top right). In order, these are a simplified Roman majuscule S, a Roman cursive s, a lazier Roman cursive s, a pair of esses written in a half-uncial or Carolingian fashion (the second in particular with the rounded bump); in the second row, I have tried to copy (from foggy memory) an old German cursive majuscule S and minuscule terminal s, a multi-stroke humanist s, and an Italic s.[2] I included the bottom row because they all demonstrate the single-stroke history of the old Roman cursive s—even the humanist s that gave myself four strokes to complete: the hook or bump is like a vestigial tail (the bottom bow of the round s), which is generally only absent in a long s if that tail is a descender (as in the Italic example).

 

http://troglophonic.org/calligraphy/LongS.jpg

 

In my searching, I did find a few awesome pages devoted to the long s. The two I found most useful:

 

Long and Short of Letter S is fantastic!

 

Medieval Writing's History of S is pretty good, but since the esses are presented out of context, it's hard to tell if the hookless examples descend below the writing line. I will grumble to myself for days, I tell you!

 

[1] I am neither a historian nor a scientist, and my understanding is easily prone to error. Please forgive me if I'm inaccurate, but please also correct me. I'm pretty curious about this sort of thing and would rather be correct than right.

 

[2] My foggy memory may be untrustworthy, but I think most long esses I've seen in Italic exemplars do not have descenders, but they do have a hook in the middle. In my estimation, the long s with a descender seems to have been more popular in America; English speakers, in general, didn't seem to care about the medial/terminal distinction that the Germans did, and Americans seemed to enjoy the lavish long s that takes up as much ink as the rest of the word combined ;-)

 

Fascinating. Thanks much!

 

Doug

[WestLothian]

Coulée #120

 

 

 

http://artflx.uchicago.edu/images/encyclopedie/V19/plate_19_21_11.jpeg

 

 

 

 

The Encyclopedia of Diderot & d'Alembert

 

 

 

As an aside it is perhaps interesting to note that all these styles used to "compete"

 

"From the origin of printing technology, styles never ceased to compete in the various

European countries, but also between different types of uses and users of more or less

sophisticated handwriting and calligraphy styles.

 

Among European handwriting styles, French calligraphy "Francoise" or "Francaise" is

distinguished by its geometric framework where each letter must fit into a square and

constructed on a vertical axis, forcing the scribe often turn to his pen.

 

The English Roundhand writing, seeking speed, tilts and allows the scribe not to raise

his hand for writing a complete word.

 

A real "war of handwritings" prevailed in the West that opposed the "ronde" to

"bâtardes" and "coulées", the "positioned" to the "expedited", the cursives to the

monumental "Gothic" recommended for titles and advertisements.

 

English and Dutch opposed the French just as strongly on writing paper as their navies

did on the open seas.

 

This competition was really only the translation of their commercial competition.

These calligraphic struggles are not unlike those that exist today between rivalling

software producers and their accusations of abusing monopolies and dominant positions.

 

At the end of the 18th century, a French calligrapher, called the "famous Bernard"

railed against the invasion of English writing, he considered a "depravity" and

he continued to fight this cause in the Office of Academic Handwriting, a protective body

created by the French government."

 

(translation from "Les conséquences de l’imprimerie sur l’écriture latine" Michel MELOT)

Edited November 25, 2012 by WestLothian