How Eliott Grunewald’s foundry OTT signals a shift in the creative industry

We last spoke to Eliott Grunewald half a decade ago, and since then, quite a lot has changed for the type designer; he’s seen the birth of his foundry, Ornamental & Title Type. “Back then [in 2020], I was starting to expand my typeface catalogue after a period where I was mainly working on custom commissions,” Eliott says. “I enjoyed the diversity of those collaborations; I had the chance to work with inspiring people who were leading amazing initiatives,” he continues. “But at the same time, I carried a persistent frustration: I lacked time to develop my own typefaces.” Often putting his personal typeface projects on hold for months at a time, Eliott yearned for a more mindful space and setup. “Designing typefaces gave me space to think deeply about form, to raise questions,” he says. “Of course, as type designers, we’re always anticipating the needs of future users, but it’s still a very open and sometimes solitary practice.”

In pursuit of this freedom, Eliott developed his own website to better champion his typefaces and to deal with font licensing more efficiently, which then blossomed into a platform to hero the work of others, too. “As I thought more about it, I realised it might be time to evolve my practice,” he says. After bringing in collaborators in order to fully embrace the potential of a type foundry, Ornamental & Title Type (OTT) came to be.

OTT does what it says on the tin, focusing on expressive, ornamental display typefaces (including some that Eliott describes as “intense”), that find their inspiration in the appreciation for vernacular forms. “Lettering found in the public space, on storefronts, signage, advertisements,” Elliott says, “elements that are part of a place’s visual identity and cultural landscape.”

It could be argued that OTT was born from a shift in the design industry itself, whereby creatives are more inclined and interested in opting for expressive display fonts over typefaces that are more traditionally rigorous. “I see that reflected in the rise of custom font commissions too,” Eliott says. “Of course, this is just my perspective, but I do think there’s a genuine momentum behind these typographic approaches, and that’s incredibly exciting.” 

Industry change has also come in the form of how typefaces are distributed, with platforms like Monotype and Adobe Fonts offering subscription-based models in contrast to independent foundry’s direct sales. “It raises a lot of questions about how designers are paid and how works are protected,” he adds, especially with licensing becoming less clear. “Beyond that, there’s a noticeable gap between large foundries and independent ones,” Eliott suggests. He likens the gap to the music industry’s disparity between conglomerate and independent music labels. “In type, we’re seeing the same thing, big companies own thousands of fonts, acquire smaller foundries, and absorb up-and-coming independents,” which is ultimately controlling how fonts are showcased and sold. 

Eliott continues: “It inevitably limits diversity and visibility for many designers. That said, I don’t think independent type design is at risk.” New foundries are seemingly cropping up every day and doing so with ever-more novel, experimental approaches. “Maybe it feels like the market is getting crowded, but I don’t think that’s a bad thing,” Elliot says, suggesting instead that it’s a sign of a thriving industry. “But in the end, it’s users who decide which fonts get used,” with the scene being ultimately dependent on developing tastes and needs. “The industry is evolving on multiple levels” – be it technologically, economically, or traditionally – “you can be excited about digital innovation and still want to preserve craft-based practices,” such as calligraphy, sign painting or lettering, he adds. “The two aren’t incompatible,” Eliott ends, “as long as that diversity is preserved, type will remain a rich field – one that keeps reinventing itself.”