But then comes a question from your boss, that all creatives fear, “What does this font actually cost?”. And suddenly, the tables turn and instead of the meeting being about a design discussion it turns into a debate about budgets. But there’s no reason to be nervous! It’s no surprise that your boss wants to know why they should spend money on a typeface, especially when there are free alternatives out there and they can’t see an immediate return on investment. 

So let’s dive deep into the top objections to type that Agencies, Design Teams and Marketing Departments have to contend with. Some arguments are valid, yet others are often due to misunderstandings. All are easy to refute when you start regarding a typeface as a building block that is key to good organizational infrastructure and foundations of any brand.

This is a very good question and the answer, ‘Our current font works just fine, why do we need change?’, on the surface, also seems very valid. In actual fact, a font change isn’t like an annual spring clean, that needs to happen every year. If your current typeface works well and stands the test of time, it should stay. 

Yet it should still be subject to the same stringent tests and scrutiny that any other building block of your brand faces. Whenever you’re looking at a new brand or a relaunch of any brand, you must consider the logo, colors, tone of voice and the visual language. Each element must be put to the ‘Time Test’, to see if it represents your brand not only today but also tomorrow. So it goes without saying that this also applies to your choice of font too. As independent studies have shown, typography shapes your brands personality.[1]  

Therefore, the crucial question to ask is “Does our current font still work?” and if the answer is “But we’ve always used it”, then it’s time to consider a change. In any redesign, keeping a typeface is as much a design decision as changing it.

To any critics or skeptics, you can say “Just because we’re doing a redesign, doesn’t mean that we have to change the typeface. But, whilst we’re looking at the whole brand, it makes sense to review the font choice at the same time and see if it still fits?”.

Without doubt, a Logo is important, but it has an enviably very simple job to do, it signals who the ‘Sender’ is, like a stamp or seal of approval. A great typeface, on the other hand, does so much more. It acts as a kind and consistent messenger, carrying all the brand’s messages, in a considered and consistent manner. Guiding the audience through products, apps, websites and all manner of touch points where a customer or your audience may encounter the brand. 

In short: a Logo signals the speaker while the typeface sets the tone. A Logo is like a signature while the font is the voice. While we encounter a signature occasionally, in every conversation, we hear the voice. 

So it makes no sense at all to pit the Logo against the Font. Both are brand assets with their own unique role to play. However, there’s one tangible and compelling advantage of a good typeface, it’s always used whenever the brand has something to say. 

So the next time you’re faced with a skeptic or critic, here’s what you have to say: “Our Logo shows who we are. Our typeface makes sure that we are heard and recognized, even when our Logo is out of sight.” or “Our Logo is our stamp while our typeface carries and delivers our message.”

Yes of course, you can absolutely change your brand’s fonts at any time (unlike any IT infrastructure!). But don’t forget that any corporate font is used across the company and they aren’t simply stored in a single folder on a single server. The fonts will be embedded in the websites and apps, they will appear in presentations, company templates, PDFs, on packaging, signage, adverts and reports and much more. The longer a font has been used, the deeper it’s left an imprint and penetrates a company’s infrastructure. 

Imagine you’re trying to change the location of a plug socket when building a house, when you’re still in the blueprint phase it’s really easy to do. But once you’ve built a house and moved in, it takes contractors time, money and a lot of patience to move it. 

So when it comes to fonts, there are some important questions that need to be considered. “Does the replacement work in all languages? Will all templates, websites and apps need to be switched and updated? Has everyone been told about the change? Will all the documents that have been in circulation for a long time?” So, instead of “We’ll do it later” being the cheaper option, it could actually work out to be a really expensive and an inefficient use of time. 

In the face of such criticism, here’s a great response “Of course we can change our font later, but if we decide to do that today, we’ll just have to confront the problem later, costing more time and money and will have to tinker with it in thousands of places.”

Absolutely not! But people don’t buy cars because of the sound that their car door lock makes when it’s shut. Nevertheless car manufacturers will employ people to focus just on that sound. The sound reinforces the perception of quality and offers the customer a level of reassurance. It’s highly unlikely after a test drive that someone will say “The sound of the car locking sounded so convincing, I just have to buy this car!”. The sound and the reassurance it offers works at a subconscious level and once the car’s been bought, that special sound reinforces the conviction of the customer, day after day that “I made the right decision”. 

With fonts it’s a similar story. Customers don’t need to recognize or even know the name of a typeface for it to have an impact. Typography is one of the few signals that can subtly yet powerfully convey a brand’s identity. When the typeface feels out of place, it can weaken and lessen the impact of the brand. The tricky thing about type is that it works at a subconscious level, you can’t escape its influence and this is precisely its superpower.

So the question isn’t whether someone buys a product because of the typeface used, but rather: Should a company leave the impact of its most important communication medium to chance?

Here’s what you could say to management: “No, our customers don’t buy because of the typeface. But every time they read something from us, our typeface communicates with them. Whether we want it to or not.”

Otherwise translated as “What’s invisible or can’t be consciously perceived can’t have an effect!”. But again this is the magic of how our perception works. For example, in a restaurant, we usually won’t notice the lighting until it makes us feel uncomfortable. In a cinema, when watching a film, we won’t notice the music until it triggers an emotional response in us. And, very often, we can’t explain why a particular piece of packaging or branding looks ‘high quality’ to us. Despite not being able to ‘see’ any of these things, all these signals have an impact on our feelings.

In fact, with typefaces, you can actually measure this effect. In a series of perception studies[2] identical messages were displayed/set in different typefaces. The results were startling, a well-chosen typeface can increase a positive reaction by up to 13%, it can improve memorability by up to 10% and it can improve trust by 9%. None of the test subjects were expected to recognize the typefaces or understand typography. 

For brands this means: fonts don’t actually have to stand out to make a difference. They are always working in the background, every time someone encounters or reads something by a brand. 

Here’s what to tell your boss: “Our customers and audience don’t need to be able to ‘tell’ the difference but they do need to ‘feel’ it!”

In actual fact, there is a myriad of Open-Source-Fonts. Many are well-designed, technically flawless and are even suitable for international projects. But is FREE a selection criteria for a brand? Certainly no more so than ‘EXPENSIVE’. The key question brands should be asking is “Which typeface best suits my company’s needs and requirements?”, not the cost.

Many large organizations and brands use Open-Source software. But when choosing a core CMS, integrated Booking System or secure Payment Platform, no CEO in their right mind would say “Let’s go with the free option, it should definitely work!”. In actual fact, they would test the function, security, expandability, support and sustainability and how well the system can be integrated into the current infrastructure. 

With fonts, it shouldn’t be any different! Some typical questions here would be “Does it fit with our brand personality? Does it stand alone and is it distinctive enough to improve and encourage brand recognition? Does it support all languages and characters that we need? Does it work in Print, Web, App, Social Media and Office? Can all staff use it in a legally compliant way? Will it be further developed? And most importantly, is there someone I can call when it goes wrong?”.

A free font might be able to answer ‘yes’ to all the above questions, and if it does then maybe it is the right choice. But the decision would not actually be based on whether it is free or not but if it fits your requirements and is able to deal with all the tasks at hand.

When faced with the people who have purchasing power and make the decisions about budgets and cost, here’s how you could answer: “There’s nothing wrong with a free font but let’s not confuse ‘free’ with ‘fit for purpose’. We should choose the font that best meets and suits our requirements. If that solution happens to be free, then that’s great, but it shouldn’t be the only deciding factor.”

Well, actually quite a lot, if employees are given free rein and free range to go off and start finding free fonts on the internet on their own.

The problem isn’t so much to do with Open-Source fonts from a reputable and trustworthy source. It’s actually more to do with when a font isn’t available internally and someone hunts down a free copy from a download or piracy site. A few weeks down the line and no one can trace the source, knows if it is actually technically sound or even if it’s actually permitted for commercial use. 

So what started as a typographical problem soon escalates to a topic for IT, Legal and Compliance. This also happens when employees modify font files on their own (for example, when trying to add or alter additional characters). Any modifications can violate license conditions and bypass and corrupt established approval and security processes. 

Prioritising approved and properly licensed fonts is also a matter of IT security. The company knows where the font comes from, who is allowed to use it and who is responsible for it and who to contact if there are technical problems or questions.

So you can reply to the optimists: “When it comes to fonts, we should apply the same rules as we do for any other type of software. We need to know where it’s come from, who’s allowed to use it and who is responsible for it.”

Don’t get cross with this question or take it the wrong way, the person asking simply hasn’t recognized a font’s value yet. A few thousand Euros for a font is a lot of money! Yet the amount on the invoice reveals very little about the true cost of the investment. To determine that, we need to understand for how long and how intensively the organization will use the font as an asset. 

It’s very rare that someone can appreciate and evaluate the value of an office chair or piece of software based solely on its initial cost. Companies often factor in the duration, frequency of use and overall utilization of the asset. So why should a different logic apply to fonts? Here’s a real life example: A font license for €3500, which is used as part of a five year long campaign and presentation costs around €1.90 per day, which is less than the average cost of daily consumption of coffee in an office.

This calculation becomes really compelling and convincing when you compare the cost of a font to the lifespan of other ‘brand investments’. A campaign can last two weeks, then there’s a new one. A conference or event stand is used just a couple of times and then is changed. A corporate film becomes outdated after 24 months. In contrast, a well-considered font choice works day in, day out over many years across every one of any brand’s communication touchpoints. Therefore, the crucial question is not, “What does a font cost?” but rather, “What does it cost us annually? And what value does it deliver during that time?”. 

So when you’re standing in front of the Board, this is how you can answer that question: “Let’s not regard this investment in isolation. If we use the fonts for five years, they’ll cost us just a few Euros a day, and, in return, they will represent our brand every single time our audience or customers interact with them.”

First things first, you can’t actually ‘buy’ a font in the traditional sense because they are legally protected as software and intellectual property. Whenever you spend money on a font, you are acquiring a License to be able to use it (aka End User License Agreement) that grants you the right to use the font software under specific conditions.

Font Licensing is complicated and differs from foundry to foundry. Although many foundries distinguish between similar types of usage, such as Desktop, Web or App, the actual terms and prices can vary hugely. This will vary hugely when the price depends on the number of users, amount of traffic and other variable metrics, so it’s really worth paying attention and checking the terms!

And this is where Font Licensing becomes more a case of risk assessment and risk management. Companies should not only ask, what the cost of the font is today or on an annual basis, but if the license will evolve alongside any potential future business growth or expansion. Fair licensing models often take this into account and allow for some degree of flexibility, so that in the event of adding an extra employee or when traffic spikes or there’s an extra app, the license isn’t immediately violated. 

So to answer this question, you can say: “We’re not paying for the same typeface each year. We are in fact ensuring that our User licenses evolve and align with our own company growth and development, thereby ensuring there are no nasty surprises!”

To return to that very first question, “Why should we pay for fonts?”… Perhaps your boss or the management team should assess and evaluate the cost of the investment in fonts in the same way they would invest in hardware and infrastructure. So then, instead, the question becomes “What does this purchase achieve? How often will it be used? How long does it hold it’s value? Are there alternatives?”. 

A typeface only becomes expensive when it doesn’t deliver value relative to its price and if it will eventually need to be replaced. In contrast, a well-considered and well-chosen font at a reasonable license fee can be a surprisingly cost-effective and worthwhile branding tool and investment that does the job for years.

—

[1] Using Type Font Characteristics to Communicate Brand Personality of New Brands, Journal of Brand Management, Springer Nature, 2012
[2] Why fonts make us feel: A scientific study exploring the emotional impact of type. Neurons × Monotype, London 2021

Nevertheless, the festival will be remembered for its powerful films and outstanding actors and actresses. Perhaps also for its visual identity, even if it only reached Berliners, tourists, and festival-goers. Berlin-based designer Claudia Schramke was once again responsible for the poster and key visual of the 2026 Berlinale. Festive, colorful, and playful, the bear returned to the center stage of the visual identity. Schramke describes the core concept of the brand as follows: “This year’s Berlinale Bear is a veritable festival creature, composed of points of light that represent people, perspectives, and films. They come together, connect, enter into a dialogue, and collectively become something greater and stronger.”

To contrast with the vibrant colors of the key visual, Schramke chose a clean typography. White, static text set as a consistent typographic block — compact, precise, and in a uniform font size. This rigor ensures a powerful visual presence and clear legibility. For the typeface, the choice fell on Tausend, a new sans-serif family from Fontwerk, designed by Christoph Koeberlin in collaboration with Gabriel Richter. Tausend follows in the tradition of German sans-serif typefaces, but with an anarchic core: the slight overhang, the gentle top-heaviness, the smile and wink in the curves.

Koeberlin describes his typeface’s personality as: “Brutally honest, self-assured, and confident.” Not a bad choice for a festival that has had to weather a lot of headwinds. In particular the optical size, Tausend Medium, which is dense, compact and with unpolished forms, leaves a strong and lasting impression on the branding.

“Visually, Tausend stands out with its clear, concise design and unmistakable Berlin flair: minimalist, self-assured, and subtly distinctive. It remains understated enough not to dominate, yet possesses enough character to lend depth to the visual identity. Providing an ideal complement to the expressive yet delicate, particle-based key visual.” noted Claudia Schramke.

For Fontwerk, the 2026 Berlinale appearance is more than just another case study. For the second year in a row, Claudia Schramke has chosen a typeface from our library for the globally renowned film festival (in 2025, she chose Pangea). The fact that a designer has once again reached for one of our fonts is no coincidence: it speaks to the breadth and contemporary appeal of the Fontwerk portfolio.

Try Tausend

Try Tausend

What began as a local initiative in Oakland has evolved into a transregional community that provides a platform for Latinas in one of the world’s most dynamic economic regions. To really bring cohesion to any collective, a clear and compelling visual identity that makes their energy visible is vital. The Chingonas’ visual identity revolves around their collective strength. It captures the presence and energy of its members, blending boldness with warmth and openness. This is evident across every medium: in the logo, in printed materials, on posters, and, of course, on social media, where the Chingonas reach their widest audience. But an enormously expressive visual language also unfolds on canvas bags, T-shirts, and other merchandise: unmistakable, feminist, festive.

The person responsible for the visual identity is Sofia Llaguno, a Mexican designer based in San Francisco. Her goal was to develop an identity that isn’t imposed on the collective but rather emerges from the values, attitude, and energy of the women who embody it. The color palette reflects this passion through an interplay of deep and vibrant reds, balanced with warm neutrals. As the brand typeface, Llaguno chose Nikolai Condensed, a display typeface whose angular, striking forms embody exactly what the collective radiates: strength without harshness, boldness without fanfare.

Nikolai is a modern serif with distinctive architecture and typographic impact. Designed by Franziska Weitgruber, it evolved from a Renaissance model into an emancipated, contemporary family with strong contrast and angular forms that have outgrown any historical template.

Chingonas Collective uses the Condensed Light style: slim, upright, and with the sharpness the collective aims to project. As a corporate font, Nikolai delivers exactly the impact it was made for: confident in appearance and unmistakable across every channel. Sofia Llaguno describes Nikolai’s strength as follows:

According to Llaguno, the brand exudes an atmosphere reminiscent of “red lipstick and hoop earrings”, self-assured, uncompromising, and festive.

Try Nikolai

Representing the best of the best, TDC awards are presented those who clearly stand out from the crowd.

Up until now, it was simply a matter of being crowned a winner of an award (Certificate of Typographic Excellence). But this year, for the first time ever, there is a gold, silver, and bronze award in each category.

What can we say? The Tausend Collection has won one of the first new TDC Type-High Awards in bronze, this is hot on the heels of the Hiiibrand Awards, the international ADC Awards, and the German ADC Awards. In the ‘Text + Display Typefaces’ category, Tausend was also named Judges’ Choice, which is the personal favorite entry for each competition judge. These tend to be some of the most exemplary works, but do not require unanimous approval.

Even though the ‘Audience Award’ remains the most important one for us, receiving recognition from the highest authority naturally feels incredibly good.

Once again, we extend our heartfelt congratulations to the two designers, Christoph Koeberlin and Gabriel Richter, for this thoroughly deserved recognition!

Try Tausend

She is best known to a wide audience through her ARD late night show ‘Inas Nacht’, in which she has combined music, conversations and North German directness since 2007. At the same time, she has established herself as a musician with several successful albums in which she combines personal lyrics with musical authenticity.

Her most successful album to date, 6.0, was released on November 14, 2025 and Müller reached number one in the German charts for the first time. The album cover is decorated in bright red and is dedicated to love in all its facets, from the beautiful to the humorous to the bittersweet moments. 6.0 marks not only a commercial peak, but also an artistic moment of intensification: reduced, self-confident and clear in expression.

This attitude is also reflected in the artwork. Sven Grot from the Hamburg design agency B—99 was hired as Art Director by Sony Music and was responsible for the design and visual concept. The project encompasses a wide range of formats: from a simple CD digipack to various vinyl editions, including a gatefold double album and an elaborately produced limited edition with a large-format photo book in a slipcase.

In several design meetings, Sven Grot, Ina Müller, and her music manager Adriana Schulz developed a visual identity that focuses on photography accompanied by strong typography. This design language was also to be reflected on the Ina Müller website.

The central player in the artwork is our very own Sans, McQueen, whose namesake reinforces her DNA: the antihero with two faces. The core family combines contradictory principles: a strong contrast with ink-trap-like cuts and geometric architecture. This is precisely why McQueen is exceptionally legible, even in the small print. For 6.0, McQueen proved to be the ideal choice. It stands out powerfully against the reduced, visual power of the imagery and works well both in the title sentence and in the paragraph text. Together, photography and text give the album artwork a timeless presence.

“It was important to me to find a typeface that had something special and harmonized well with photography.” recalls art director Sven Grot.

The final decision for the typeface landed on McQueen in Regular and Bold – not least because Ina Müller immediately fell in love with the design. “As always, she was right,” said Grot. So, it’s no surprise that McQueen now also features on Ina’s website.

Try McQueen

Try McQueen

Hot on the heals of the recent wins for Tausend, we are overjoyed to see Tausend Collection shortlisted (‘Auszeichnung’) in the ADC Competition 2026 in the Typography and Type Design category. This means the typeface is among the 575 winners of this year’s competition, selected from 8,000 entries. If our calculations are correct, that means Tausend is among the top 7%.

Huge congratulations again, Christoph and Gabriel.

Try Tausend

The need for a custom typeface arose from the desire to replace the existing typeface, FF Marselis, with a future-proof alternative, to expand its stylistic and content-related scope, and thereby carefully evolve the brand. Its distinctive feature is its breadth: the superfamily consists of a sans serif, a slab serif, and a serif family. While sans-serif/serif or sans-serif/slab pairs are not uncommon, the situation is different with such a three-part configuration. After extensive research, no retail alternative was found that met the requirements.

Fontwerk’s agile structure allows us to assemble the ideal team for every project. Whenever needed, we can expand our core team with experts from our international network. For RuV Type, we rounded out our team with Jan Fromm, who is known for his wide stylistic range and with whom we had previously collaborated on the extensive serif typeface family “Nice” (which is currently being expanded to include a similarly extensive sans serif counterpart).

At the start of the project, we traveled to the company headquarters in Wiesbaden to conduct a workshop, which we facilitated with R+V’s marketing, UI, and design teams, as well as MetaDesign Düsseldorf. During the session, we addressed the question of what form-defining requirements are embedded in the three R+V brand values: inspiring, cooperative, and solid.

These brand values should also be translated into design criteria through a collaborative process. We applied them to fundamental conceptual considerations: the overall impression of the typeface, its structure, and its details.

For the brand value of “inspiring”, the typeface should be dynamic, expressive, and personal, for the brand value of “cooperative”, the typeface should be approachable, organic, and human, and last but not least, for “solid”, it should be robust, confident, and balanced.

To define the design criteria even more clearly for all workshop participants, we took it a step further. We also agreed on characteristics that should be explicitly excluded. The new typeface should not be static, generic, or distant in its details; it should not be cold, geometric, or technical in its overall impression and it should not be fragile, childish, or restless in its construction.

Armed with these clear definitions and exclusion criteria, we began designing the sans serif core family. To do this, we developed four possible design directions based on initial letters that could be compared and evaluated as headlines. Only after the design of RuV Sans was finalized were RuV Slab and RuV Serif to be designed, though we sketched out a suitable Slab variant at this stage.

For the sans serif typeface, we interpreted the characteristics in four different ways. We developed one concept with a more modern, lively, and open character, which we named Antwerp. We also designed a typeface called Hamburg which had a more bold and warm character, a third style called The Hague was created with more classic, handwritten features, and lastly we developed a more understated English-style variant named Brighton.

We presented our four proposals, highlighting their individual characteristics, and incorporated them into rough mockups so that the R+V team could evaluate them more effectively. We also presented the four design directions side by side to ensure better comparability.

Then came the most exciting part of the project. First, we conducted an internal evaluation at Fontwerk to assess how well our own designs met the design criteria. To do this, we created three specific definitions for each of the three brand values and analyzed whether the designs aligned with them to a small, moderate, or strong degree. In the best-case scenario, a total of 3 × 9 = 27 points was possible.

For “calibration,” we started with R+V’s existing corporate typeface, FF Marselis. We tried to remain as objective as possible. Since the choice of typeface predated the definition of the brand values, we arrived at a score of only 22 points, which can be interpreted as very decent from this perspective. It scored particularly well in terms of its dynamic and personal details, its human overall impression, and its robust and confident construction. Our intention was, of course, not to criticize what already existed; therefore, we applied a similarly critical and objective approach to our own designs.

For example, we assessed Antwerp as somewhat less expressive, though it revealed its strengths in its dynamism, humanity, robustness, and confidence.

With 24 points, we rated the Dutch variant “The Hague,” which draws on cursive script, on par with “Antwerp.” In terms of overall impression, it checked all the boxes.

The English variant “Brighton” scored the lowest, if one even wants to use that word with such excellent designs ;), with 20 points. According to our own assessment, three designs were therefore a bit better suited to R+V’s brand values than the current corporate typeface, while one concept fell slightly short.

But the truth lies with the client. So we had the exercise carried out by our counterparts from the R+V marketing, UI, and design teams, as well as MetaDesign’s Creative Director Arne Schmidt. Their results were similar to ours (they rated Marselis and Hamburg as somewhat more suitable, and The Hague and Brighton as somewhat less suitable). Bolstered by their ratings, they unanimously agreed on the Antwerp design.

Based on this, we quickly incorporated initial revision requests and focused on fine-tuning, developing the stroke weights and a basic alphabet from A to z, as well as a first proper draft of the slab.

Some notable changes included, “straightening out” the diagonals, a shorter shoulder on the prominent “r", the replacement of the double-story “g,” and lighter dots. Subtle ink traps were also added to compensate for optical convergence.

In the following iterations, countless detail improvements were added, allowing us to complete the basic alphabet in the upright weights fairly quickly.

We then adjusted the Slab to a comparable level. To do this, we repeatedly ran parallel tests using actual marketing materials provided to us by the client. This allowed us to assess how well the first two members of the family harmonize with one another. With the delivery of the first beta fonts (TTF format, initially only auto-hinting and basic kerning), the R+V team also had the opportunity to provide better feedback and “get comfortable” with the new visual identity early on.

The subsequent intensive testing phase at R+V gave us the opportunity to begin work on the third typeface in the family, the serif. Although it will be used less prominently, as a stylistic option for the future it will be treated with the same meticulous care as its two sisters. The first step here was to design a well-crafted basic alphabet to make a good first impression.

Since switching fonts in such large companies typically involves a significant amount of work updating existing templates and documents, we still needed to determine how closely we should align with the letter spacing of the previous typeface. In principle, the letter spacing was already similar, but of course not identical. It was agreed to reduce the deviations as much as the character of the new typeface allowed, without, however, making painful compromises.

Other technical issues that needed to be clarified at this point concerned the vertical metrics. For historical reasons, fonts contain three different sets of data that programs use for interpretation.

These three pairs of values were not identical in Marselis, this resulted in an upward shift in some programs, such as InDesign.

Our goal therefore was to synchronize the value pairs to ensure consistent vertical spacing across all programs. While this would cause issues with existing InDesign templates, it would be the most reliable solution in the long run.

The next step involved laying out the new versions of the Sans and Slab beta fonts. These new versions were thoroughly optimized, included a complete character set, finalized spacing and kerning, full OpenType functionality (figure sets, superscript and subscript figures and letters, ordinals, fractions, slashed zero, ligatures, contextual alternates, case-sensitive forms for capital letters, and language-specific forms), as well as optimized hinting; and initial betas for the italics and serif fonts with a basic character set and finalized spacing. Here, too, the practice of testing using real-world application examples was continued, which allowed for continuous feedback on the design.

The serif counterpart could be designed more efficiently based on the existing sans and slab families. In the final phase of the project, in addition to expanding the italics, we were able to focus entirely on the third family member, which had previously been developed only in broad strokes. Since it will initially be used exclusively in the employee magazine, we designed it with a focus on its use in editorial design.

In conclusion, we were able to deliver the three-part exclusive superfamily, including comprehensive documentation: 24 static and six variable fonts, each with 568 characters and support for approximately 100 Latin-based languages.

Thanks to the ongoing involvement of the relevant departments at R+V, the implementation has proceeded without any significant issues so far—with equal joy and enthusiasm on the part of both the client and the producers.

We are not only proud of our most extensive custom font project to date, but also deeply inspired by the exceptionally great collaboration. When a client embodies its brand values as R+V does, translating them into design criteria comes easily.

This project demonstrates once again that respectful collaboration on a level playing field, as was the case here, from the initial contact through to the distribution of the finished fonts, guarantees the best results and that when a custom solution is unavoidable, involving all internal stakeholders early on is crucial to a project’s success.

Learn more about our services

Much of the work we do, goes on behind closed doors and requires phenomenal amounts of blood, sweat and ink, so there is something really rather special, when we hear good award news about one of our typefaces. So we are absolutely over the moon to celebrate not one, but two, recent notable awards and mentions for Tausend by Christoph Koeberlin and Gabriel Richter.

Tausend was awarded a Merit in the Hiiiibrand Design Awards 2025, in the Professional Typography Category for Latin Type Design and it scored a Merit Honor in the 2026 ADC Awards, in the category Typography/Lettering.

Congratulations on the accolades, Christoph and Gabriel!

Try Tausend