Hi. Here is where I saw the difference. It is from the Typewriter Database.

http://typewriterdatabase.com/1968-royal-fps.1241.typewriter

I came closest to matching it to the Royal Quiet Deluxe font that Richard Polt demonstrates here: (http://site.xavier.edu/polt/typewriters/tw-fonts.html) but there are differences in the Q, j, Oo, 2, 3, and even the 6. There are other differences as well.

Thanks for your help. Oh... Is Uwe your actual name? How do you pronounce it?

Much appreciated!

Liv2BTru2u wrote:

Is Uwe your actual name? How do you pronounce it?

Yes, it's a real name, and fairly common in some parts of the world, but less so when it comes to North America. I gave up long ago trying to get people to pronounce it correctly, and have settled for telling the to say duvet without the d. Of course this only works if the person knows how to properly say duvet.

I'm going to have to look into this S variant more. I'm not sure I like the typeface, but I'd have to see what an entire page of it looks like. Here are the typefaces on my FPs for comarison:

1957 FPE (elite): http://typewriterdatabase.com/1957-royal-fp.2845.typewriter
1959 FPE (elite): http://typewriterdatabase.com/1959-royal-fp.2736.typewriter
1958 FPP (pica): http://typewriterdatabase.com/1958-royal-fp.1109.typewriter
 

Okay, that freaked me out a little. Kind of sad when a three letter name needs a YouTube video to explain its pronunciation, but the video is bang on. Thanks for point that out to me, I'll be sure to point others to it. 

You're right that typeface preferences can be a very subjective choice, however, there are objective elements involved when choosing a good typeface for certain applications. For example, you might really like a cursive typeface, and it would make a good choice for a short personal letter, or for use on an invitation card, but it's a horrible choice for a writer who spends the day editing what they've typed. Typeface design is a rather complex art form, and what might look nice on the page and contain asthetic appeal can be a poor choice when it legibility is the primary concern. The true test for such things is to type out an entire page and see how the typeface works when stacked line upon line. I've found that the type samples we collectors produce for the machines we have is not a very good indication of a typeface's usefullness.

FPP, FPE and FPS 

FPP 10 pitch machine with pica type, the machines made in Canada had Royal Pica type P but machines made in Holland had Ransmayer Pica Ro1 

10 pitch machines could be fitted with Elite type face at customer's request. (not fitted in the factory) 

FPE 12 pitch machine with Elite type machines made in Canada had Royal Elite type Eand later Ransmayer Ra 246 but machines made in Holland had Ransmayer Elite Ro7 

Special type could also be fitted ether as standard a type face, split typeface or hand engraved typeface. 

FPS could have 5, 10,12,16 and 20 pitch and almost any type face. 

5 pitch any typeface requited by the customer
10 pitch Imperial Pica Ro82 was one of the most common but the customer could request other typefaces factory fitted .
12 pitch Imperial Elite Ro84 and Brussels Ro88 were both common but the customer could request other typefaces factory fitted.
16 pitch any typeface requited by the customer
20 pitch any typeface requited by the customer 

Motion on the Royal FPThe motion on the Canadian FP was 6.73mm
The motion on the early Dutch was 6.6mm then later 7.6mm motion 
The normal motion for Portable Typewriters was 6.73 or 6.6mm 

PF typewriters were built with 11”, 13”, 16”, 21”, 27” and 33” carriages  
 

Last edited by dukedford (22-6-2015 13:36:44)