Morisawa Type Design Competition 2024

Japanese category

Osamu Torinoumi

Typeface Designer

I have always focused on creating basic typefaces, and in this judging process, I evaluated entries with that perspective, prioritizing those with a high level of completeness.
I believe that fonts are fundamentally based on handwritten characters, so I did not recommend typefaces that were primarily computer-generated—those where the structure was drawn with paths and then given weight mechanically.
This time, we received over 140 submissions, and I appreciate the enthusiasm of so many participants. While that is certainly a positive thing, I personally prefer to emphasize quality over quantity. Typography is profoundly deep. In a chaotic era like today, I feel that it is especially important to approach lettering with care and intention. I find myself reflecting on the typefaces that emerge from such a mindset.

Japanese category

Ryoko Nishizuka

Principal Designer of Adobe

With typography creation becoming more digitally driven and tools evolving, I got the impression that the submitted works were, for better or worse, fairly consistent. While legibility has improved, I believe there were fewer works with an element of surprise in them.
In this judging process, I didn’t recommend works that clearly relied too heavily on tools and showed minimal craftsmanship, such as those where the skeleton of the type was only outlined or the stroke ends were mechanically altered, or where the hand’s trace had been lost.
Creating a good typeface isn’t just about spending a lot of time, but rather how much research has been done, how much has been written and practiced, and how much effort has been put into creating something that doesn’t yet exist. Such passion is something we can feel, and it is definitely something we will continue to look for in the future.

Japanese category

Issay Kitagawa

CEO of GRAPH / Designer / Artist

What I focused on throughout the judging process was whether the creators were perspective-takers—whether they could adopt the viewpoints of others. Humans are inherently social beings, and writing itself was invented as a tool for communication. That means typefaces, too, cannot be purely an act of self-expression; they must be created with others in mind. In this judging process, I valued not only individuality but also this perspective. Fluency and legibility are essential aspects of typography, but from a branding designer’s standpoint, memorability is just as crucial. After all, branding is fundamentally about making something memorable. In that sense, I found it fascinating that some works created the experience of “At first, I couldn’t tell what the letters were, but as I tried to read them, they became clear.” That kind of engagement adds a unique layer of intrigue.

Latin category

Laura Meseguer

Type and Brand Designer

The judging process for this year ensured that the selected typefaces did not overlap with those from past competitions, maintained design variety, and represented different styles. In the final round, technical elements were also assessed, in addition to design quality. The winning entries were ultimately revised after reviewing the strengths of each work and reconsidering which design exhibited the highest level of completion.
Characters incorporate various elements, including historical ones. From a modern perspective, they also reflect the type designer’s lifestyle, environment, culture, and everything. Even when a typeface is used across borders, not bound to a specific place, I believe the designer’s personality is still reflected in the characters.

Latin category

Ilya Ruderman

Type and Graphic Designer

In this judging process, while recognizing outstanding typeface design was undoubtedly a priority, I also considered the importance of the message conveyed by the overall selection. What typefaces are worthy of recognition in 2024? Innovation, artistry, originality, diversity, technical skill, variation, along with the impact a typeface might have when released to the market, were all factors in the selection process.
When designing a typeface, teachers and mentors often stress the importance of a serious approach, considering tools, history, and form. My hope is that type designers continue to strive for innovation without losing sight of the design process. As judges, we can sense their effort and enjoyment reflected in the typefaces that have been created.

Latin category

Indra Kupferschmid

Typographer / Professor

During the judging process, each judge had their own preferences, and the criteria for quality and innovation varied, so we didnʼt always agree on everything. However, after extensive discussions, we arrived at a selection we were all happy with, one that covered a variety of styles while focusing on modernity and novelty.
We were able to discover typefaces that were more interesting than what is currently available on the market. For type designers just starting out, I hope they will challenge themselves with innovative designs and continue to propose new surprising fonts and families.

Simplified Chinese category

Zhu Zhiwei

Type Director

The overall level of the entries was high, and many of them combined a cohesive design that excels in both style and overall execution. The judging criteria included practicality as well as style and characteristics. The impression that many of the designs had a handwritten quality could be attributed not only to many of the designers being inspired by calligraphy, but also to the digital age that has allowed calligraphy and brush-style typefaces to be processed directly on the computer. Instead of merely pursuing novelty in form, I’d like to see a deeper exploration of what “newness” truly means, beginning with the way we use letters.

Simplified Chinese category

Chen Rong

Associate Professor / Art Director

The entries we received demonstrated a high level of performance despite this being the first time the competition categories were expanded to include Simplified Chinese. There was a good number of characters in the sample texts, and a well-balanced variety of character types helped us determine the level and quality of the entries.
The evaluation criteria included the concept of the work, attention to detail, and legibility when set at small point sizes. We reviewed the specimens to check whether these criteria were met and that the concepts were effectively conveyed. Ultimately, the winning entries were selected heavily based on the level of completion and novelty, while diversity was also taken into consideration.
It was impressive to see the considerably high quality of the figures and the alphabet, even though it was not required for this category. I think this is a positive trend.

Simplified Chinese category

Liu Xiaoxiang

Art Director of XXL Studio

Two key points weighed heavily in the evaluation. The first was the legibility of text type set at a small point size. For instance, we checked whether the legibility was ensured both in horizontal and vertical settings when the typeface was set at 12pt. The second was the logic, or the reason for how the design was executed to combine Chinese letters with alphanumerics. We evaluated the entries with these two points in mind.
From a book designer’s perspective, I felt there was a gap between my expectations for text types and what the entries proposed. Unfortunately, there were not many text types that made me want to use them right away, but even so, all the winning entries were highly intriguing.

Traditional Chinese category

Masaaki Hiromura

Graphic Designer

When I was assigned to be a judge for the Kanji category at the last Morisawa Type Design Competition, I recognized the unique challenges of designing a Japanese typeface that encompasses a mix of kanji and kana letters. This time, as a judge for the Traditional Chinese category, I realized that it takes a skill set to create a cohesive design using only Chinese characters. As a new category, it was good that all of us as judges were able to carefully examine each typeface in detail and reach a consensus on our evaluations.
The extremely important points in designing a typeface are how to achieve harmony in the characters as a whole on top of the skills in rendering all the letters, and to consistently reflect the concept throughout each letter. I have learned anew that, in the absence of these basic qualities, a typeface may fail to be considered for a prize.

Traditional Chinese category

Julius Hui

Typeface Designer

There was a variety of styles among the entries, but I thought it was important to select good works with a positive and objective perspective, rather than based on personal preference.
For the judging process, we reviewed the entries in groups of three. We discussed selecting the most deserving works we all agreed upon.
The group of judges for the Traditional Chinese category consisted of me, a typeface designer, along with two designers, Mr. Hiromura and Ms. Ho. Given our respective roles, I focused on the technical aspects, such as details and balance of the typeface, while the other designers looked at the application, that is, whether the typefaces are designed to convey what the user intends to communicate. As we carefully worked through each challenge using this approach for each entry, we selected the most prize-worthy works, which became a very well-balanced lineup.

Traditional Chinese category

Wan Chun Ho

Graphic Designer

The wide variety of designs in the entries was truly impressive. Even as graphic designers, we were surprised by how many unique works were submitted.
All the judges reviewed and evaluated each work as one group. When we couldn’t reach a consensus, each of us gave opinions from our respective areas of expertise. We looked closely at the works from two key perspectives of craftsmanship and design, focusing on structure, treatment of drawn lines, balance of density, and the level of completion.
As judges, we believe it is important that we treat all the entries with respect. Since we had enough time to discuss in depth between the three of us this time, we were able to select a series of outstanding works.

Hangeul category

Wujin Sim

Typographer / Type Director / Writer

Originality, aesthetics, and diversity were the key criteria upon which the three of us discussed and reviewed the works. Not only did we assess “where the most effort was spent and to what extent,” or “who would be using this typeface in what context” as we looked at the entries, but we also reflected on the overall impression created by the winning entries as a collective. In a way, we were searching for a zeitgeist. Looking across the winners, including those in other categories, I sensed that there is “something that can resonate universally and shared among humankind.” For instance, the production of a font style with extremely thick strokes was something unthinkable in a print-dominated era, where concerns about legibility would have ruled them out. Now that digital media dominates, this has become possible. It was such a rare pleasure to witness the birth of a new typeface category in real time—only made possible by this festival bringing multiple typefaces together for evaluation.

Hangeul category

Sulki Choi

Graphic Designer

The basic Hangeul jamo, or Korean alphabet that represents consonants and vowels, consists of only 24 letters. Yet, I always feel frustrated when I see the “waste”—a transformation of consonants and vowels into different forms to represent syllables—within the Hangeul writing system, which is something I deal with daily. The winning entries showed concrete and factual evidence of understanding designers’ frustration, which made me feel heard and relieved.
A typeface composes a world as much as it is a system. I have deep respect for those who complete this world. I wish from the bottom of my heart that the designers never become worn out.

Hangeul category

Bon Min

Type Designer / Professor

During the era when we printed letters on paper, and the time we started reading letters as images on screen, type design had to consider the distinctive characteristics of each medium. Nowadays, there is no limit for expressions when it comes to paper or digital images, and the concept of readability no longer allows technical issues to be used as an excuse.
Designing typefaces has become free from constraints, and designers are expected to bring out their unique style. What is more important, however, is to“find one’s answer to comfortable readability” amidst many possible solutions. I believe this will lead to originality, and I truly encourage designers to pursue this to their heart’s content. In doing so, the possibilities of Hangeul typeface design will expand, paving the way for the next generation of trends.

Emeritus Judges

Cyrus Highsmith

Type Designer / Graphic Artist

Unlike most type design competitions, the Morisawa Type Design Competition is focused on unpublished work. This means emerging type designers have the opportunity to enter and receive the kind of recognition and rewards usually limited to established professionals. In 2024, for the first time, in addition to the usual categories for Latin and Japanese, Hangeul, Traditional Chinese, and Simplified Chinese were added. I think the result was the best Morisawa Type Design Competition since I first got involved 12 years ago. I hope that the winners will inspire the next generation of type designers to make great work as well as enter the next competition.

Emeritus Judges

Matthew Carter

Type Designer

Just looking at the Latin category, which is my only area of expertise, I found a wonderful range of styles, from classical to comical. There were hyper-condensed sanserifs, faces with both forward-slanted and back-slanted italics, letterforms with gaps in their contours that held together on the page, a lowercase of differently sized letters that bounced on the baseline, and a design of such splendid originality that it teetered on the brink of illegibility. Several of the designs were hard to pigeonhole in terms of the conventional classiﬁcations of type, but I found the eccentric and very personal work to be invigorating, a credit primarily to the inventive designers but also to the judges whose broad-minded attitude gave the 2024 competition a special place in MOTC’s long history of rewarding the best in contemporary type design.

Judges’ Overall Comments

Japanese category

Osamu Torinoumi

Ryoko Nishizuka

Issay Kitagawa

Latin category

Laura Meseguer

Ilya Ruderman

Indra Kupferschmid

Simplified Chinese category

Zhu Zhiwei

Chen Rong

Liu Xiaoxiang

Traditional Chinese category

Masaaki Hiromura

Julius Hui

Wan Chun Ho

Hangeul category

Wujin Sim

Sulki Choi

Bon Min

Emeritus Judges

Cyrus Highsmith

Matthew Carter

Japanese category

Osamu Torinoumi

Japanese category

Ryoko Nishizuka

Japanese category

Issay Kitagawa

Latin category

Laura Meseguer

Latin category

Ilya Ruderman

Latin category

Indra Kupferschmid

Simplified Chinese category

Zhu Zhiwei

Simplified Chinese category

Chen Rong

Simplified Chinese category

Liu Xiaoxiang

Traditional Chinese category

Masaaki Hiromura

Traditional Chinese category

Julius Hui

Traditional Chinese category

Wan Chun Ho

Hangeul category

Wujin Sim

Hangeul category

Sulki Choi

Hangeul category

Bon Min

Emeritus Judges

Cyrus Highsmith

Emeritus Judges

Matthew Carter