PDA

View Full Version : 49'er fonts - mid-late 80's.



kingjammy24
12-28-2005, 06:10 PM
So here's something I stumbled upon. During the mid/late 80's, the 49'ers used different fonts on the same jersey. I found the font shown on the PSI jersey. The only images I could find of it though always show it on the back of the 49'ers jerseys. The front always seems to have the snub-nosed style. That is to say, I couldn't find any images of the "gradual" style on the front, regardless of year or player.
See image below.

http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/5130/490nw.jpg

Here's an additional little nugget:
Below is a 1988 Montana, auctioned off by Lelands in August of 2001.
The description read:
"The Finest Joe Montana Game Worn Jersey Ever Offered
Incredible Montana white mesh is signed on the well-worn numbers with "Russell Athletic [size] 44" tagging. Amazingly, it includes photo evidence of game wear and 1988 LOA from Bronco Hinek, the 49ers Equipment Manager. Worn in the historic 9-11-88 game versus the New York Giants at the Meadowlands. Montana threw a last minute 78-yard touchdown to win the game 20-16, paving the way towards their third Super Bowl Championship. Comes with a videotape of the game showing Montana being pushed to the turf clean and getting back up with the tell-tale white marks that appear on the top of the front's "1". Also includes the white tape used by Hinek to mark the game the jersey was used in, and the Sports Illustrated article showing him wearing the jersey (same white mark). This is the only known road white Montana jersey that can be tied to a game with video & photo evidence and a team letter.
Price Realized: $15,852.65
- Interestingly enough the Montana below seems to also show the snub-nosed font in front and gradual font in back.

http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/5694/4957gx.jpg

Rudy.

G1X
12-28-2005, 11:41 PM
Hi Rudy,

In our previous discussion on the PSI Montana, I mentioned finding photos of three different "1" fonts in the late 1980s (not counting the curly Wilson font). One of the styles is the one shown on the back of the jerseys in your photos. I was able to find this style font on the front numbers in some photos in the book mentioned in the previous thread. The third style I found is very similar to the front "1" in your photos, except that the top of the "1" appeared to be slightly broader. However, it could well be the angle and/or distortion of the photos.

Also note that neither the Farnhorst nor the Cross appear to have the "100% nylon" flag tag. Judging by the wider gaps in the stripe pattern on these two jerseys, this is a style that preceded the narrower-gap stripe pattern on the PSI Montana. It could well be that these jerseys fall into the era before the flag tags became a staple (again, refer to the previous discussion on that topic), or an argument could be made that the flag tag wasn't showing up on the 49ers jerseys as that seems to be consistent at least in regards to these three jerseys.

What the heck does all this mean? That this is all just "goofy science" and the only real rule to remember is that there are always exceptions to the rules. And it also probably means that I spend way too much time trying to figure out things that probably can never be figured out!

Nevertheless, ignore my ramblings and keep up your good detective work.

Mark Hayne

EndzoneSports
12-30-2005, 11:08 AM
So here's something I stumbled upon. During the mid/late 80's, the 49'ers used different fonts on the same jersey. I found the font shown on the PSI jersey. The only images I could find of it though always show it on the back of the 49'ers jerseys. The front always seems to have the snub-nosed style. That is to say, I couldn't find any images of the "gradual" style on the front, regardless of year or player....

Rudy.

Rudy-

I've got to admit that your attention to detail is astonishing. Don't know that I would have picked up on this trend. Jeez, and I though I was a bit too anal. Anyway, here's some food for thought (and this comes more from my sporting goods sales background than from my game-used jersey expertise)....

In nearly all instances of modern football jerseys (1970-present), the numbering on the back is generally about 2" larger than that of the jerseys' obverse (ie ~ 12" vs 10"). While there may indeed be noticable differences in the precise shape of the numbers, this doesn't necessarily connotate a drifferent font, but rather the subtle changes in shape due to enlagement of the same font. In all four comparison photos that you've shown, the longer "nose" always is desplayed in the larger #s on the back while the shorter "nose" always appears on the front's smaller numbers. While I've no specific examples to back up my theory, my guess is that very subtle yet consistant differences are likely to appear in almost any given number font as sizes change. While not shown, I'd guess that the 4" (approximately) sleeve #s are different yet. I suspect that with enough digging, we would find that this is true in many cases, not only for mid- to late-80s 49ers jerseys, but for many throughout football and likely other sports as well.

Best regards,

kingjammy24
12-30-2005, 01:33 PM
Patrick,

I picked up on the fact that the numbers on the back are larger.
As fonts change size, the relative angles and proportions remain constant. It is these angles and proportions that a font unique and identifiable, regardless of it's size. If a certain "1", for example, has a 45 degree nose, then as the size increases, it will always keep that 45 degree nose. The nose will simply become longer and wider. These proportions also enable one font to be distinguished from another regardless of whether the 2 are different sizes. 45pt Arial can be distinguished from 12pt Verdana with no issues whatsoever. I could increase or reduce the 49'er pics below but the font on the front will always be different than the font on the back. For some reason, unbeknownst to most of us, the 49'ers chose 1 font for the front and a slightly different one for the back. Who knows..maybe they've got a real font connoiseur for an equipment manager.

Rudy.

BarryMeisel
12-30-2005, 03:19 PM
Hi Rudy,

MeiGray won, and still owns, the Montana photo-matched 1988 jersey to which you refer from the Leland's Auction.

If you need me to supply details or measurements of the numbers or tagging, I'd be happy to do so.

Happy New Year,

Barry Meisel

EndzoneSports
12-31-2005, 09:52 AM
Patrick,

I picked up on the fact that the numbers on the back are larger.
As fonts change size, the relative angles and proportions remain constant. It is these angles and proportions that a font unique and identifiable, regardless of it's size. If a certain "1", for example, has a 45 degree nose, then as the size increases, it will always keep that 45 degree nose. The nose will simply become longer and wider. These proportions also enable one font to be distinguished from another regardless of whether the 2 are different sizes. 45pt Arial can be distinguished from 12pt Verdana with no issues whatsoever. I could increase or reduce the 49'er pics below but the font on the front will always be different than the font on the back. For some reason, unbeknownst to most of us, the 49'ers chose 1 font for the front and a slightly different one for the back. Who knows..maybe they've got a real font connoiseur for an equipment manager.

Rudy.

Rudy-

I understand your point and agree with the "45pt Arial vs 12pt Verdana" analogy, though comparing modern TT fonts as generated by computer graphics to the vinyl (or tackle-twill, as applicable) lettering/#ing of 20 years ago, may be taking this a bit out of context. While not disagreeing with your statement, despite the differneces in angles, proportions, etc., I'd be willing to bet that at that time, the manufacturer (Russell in this case) still considered these to be the same font.

As an example, from the 1996 Wilson catalog (I use this as an example only because it was handy), the manufacture lists only 5 styles (fonts) of lettering and five styles of numbering. Each of these five styles is very unique and readily distinguishable from the other four (see attached .jpg). While plasuible that Russell may have offered numerous additional numbering styles for thier jerseys some 10-15 years prior to this Wilson example, it is not likely.

Whether or not the fonts differ may actually depend upon semantics and your point of view. To Russell and their client teams, circa 1985, these were probably identical fonts, just in different sizes. To current-day collectors of their wares, such as ourselves, there are noticibale differences. These differences, however, stem from the fact that we tend to nit-pick the most subtle of details. Not that this is a bad thing, only that from our perspective, it's a more important detail than it was to the manufacturers/teams of the 80s.

By the way, your obsevation of this fact got me wondering if this was something limited to the 49ers or not. Checking my own files, I think not. If you'll check the two photos atop p. 3 of the attached .pdf file (our specification sheet for a 1987 Broncos' jerseys), I think I could make the argument--looking at the length of the serrifs on the "2s"--that there is as significant a difference in these front vs. back numbers as on the 49ers "1s". What do you think?

Best regards,

kingjammy24
12-31-2005, 06:50 PM
Patrick,

"comparing modern TT fonts as generated by computer graphics to the vinyl (or tackle-twill, as applicable) lettering/#ing of 20 years ago, may be taking this a bit out of context."

Typographically speaking, the correct representation of a font isn't dependent on the medium or the way it's being generated. It's either correct or it isn't. If it isn't, then an error in producton was made.
Typography is a meticulous discipline that's had very precise and codified standards for at least the past 100 yrs. In order to be referenced as a certain style, a font must strictly adhere to the established angles and proportions of that style. There is no such thing as "almost, kinda Arial". There's only one Arial and it's got a very specific, standard blueprint. This is regardless of the medium. Print, web, textiles. Isn't vinyl or tackle-twill lettering cut out via a computer anyway? It's not like there's some poor guy with a pair of scissors cutting each number and praying he makes it look like a Varsity font. The cutting machines have their patterns dictated by a computer reading font data. (Which should hopefully be a standardized, true rendition of the font).

"I'd be willing to bet that at that time, the manufacturer (Russell in this case) still considered these to be the same font."

Perhaps, but that's simply an error on Russell's part. The truth lies in the fonts themselves. Russell can think whatever it likes, but it doesn't make it so nor does it change the truth. I would think Russell would have typographers on it's staff? I could be wrong.

"Whether or not the fonts differ may actually depend upon semantics and your point of view."

Whether fonts differ depends on the fonts. Whether I can discern the differences depends on my eyesight and knowledge. Me calling a "Block" font "Varsity" doesn't make it "Varsity". It only makes me wrong.
A font will always be what it truly is. I simply may fail in recognizing it. Semantics and points of view will never make a font something it isn't, and two different fonts will never be the same.

"To Russell and their client teams, circa 1985, these were probably identical fonts, just in different sizes."

Then Russell and their client teams are wrong. A sports team is not a typographer. Their opinion regarding fonts is almost worthless. They can think what they like, it doesn't change the truth. Typographers, not sports teams, create the rules for the fonts they create.

"To current-day collectors of their wares, such as ourselves, there are noticibale differences. These differences, however, stem from the fact that we tend to nit-pick the most subtle of details."

To any typographer worth their salt, there are differences. The differences stem from the fact that fonts have established and specific 'rules'. The rules are what you referred to as "the most subtle of details". If a person is ignorant of these rules or chooses not to follow them, that's their issue. It's akin to saying that if you nitpick, then 2 + 2 will equal 4 but if you don't, then it may equal 5 or 6. You can call it nitpicking, I call it being right or wrong.

Typography has been around longer than any of the professional sports leagues and operates independent of them. The font choices or lack of typographical knowledge of any given sports team has no bearing on the long and independently established principles of typography.

re: your 1987 Broncos photos.
From what I can discern, the font on the back is not the same as the font on the front. I understand they're different sizes, but it's somewhat apparent that the relative proportions are different. You bring up the serif on the 2. Let's say, for example, that the serif on the 2 on the front is 4% of the total height of the 2. Then on the 2 on the back, the serif should also be 4% of the total height. Actual sizes change, but proportions remain constant.

Incidentally, the Texas Rangers are well-known for having "font issues" for many years. That is to say, they would mix up fonts and font weights on their jerseys. See the "Ebay Palmeiro" jersey in a recent thread for an example. "Palmeiro" on the back has 6 letters in Block Condensed and 2 in Block Standard. They're free to do whatever they like, but they can't say it's all the same font. No amount of pretending or ignorance will make them the same font.

Rudy.

EndzoneSports
01-01-2006, 10:14 AM
Rudy-

Good points, and again, I would not disagree with any of them. I was only trying to point out that I suspect that the uniform manufacturers and teams of 20 years ago were probably much less hung up on this detail than we are today.

Then again, as we debate differences in "fonts" as if they were errors of oversight, we've overlooked the fact that manufacturers (at least in the case of the previous Wilson example provided, and very likely others) refer to lettering and numbering "styles", with absolutely no mention of specific fonts. Could it be that this was done consciuously since their typographers very well knew that a 10" full block number and a 12" full block number were indeed different fonts? Seems quite plausible to me....


Regards,

kingjammy24
01-01-2006, 06:16 PM
Barry,

Could you please post close-up photos of the tagging, front of the jersey, and back of the jersey?


thanks,

Rudy.