Automation and Artificial Intelligence in the Type Design Process: Insights from an Industry Survey
Alice Savoiea, Kai Bernaua, Wayne Dalya, Raphaela Haefligera, and Sebastian Baez-Lugob
a ECAL / University of Art and Design Lausanne (HES-SO); b EPFL+ECAL Lab, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne / EPFL
Corresponding author: Alice Savoie (alice.savoie[at]ecal.ch)
artificial intelligence; creative practice; ethics; intellectual property; type design
Abstract: This article investigates how automation (both deterministic and artificial intelligence–based) is integrated into professional type design practice, a field with exacting standards of craft and which relies on specific and long-established working methods. Drawing on an online survey conducted in early 2025, alongside detailed follow-up interviews with select type practitioners, we map current practices and attitudes, as well as the perceived risks and opportunities in the field of automation for type design in general, and the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) in particular. Data analysis established that deterministic, rule-based automation is near-ubiquitous in type designers’ workflows, and is already used for a variety of tasks such as interpolation, glyphset expansion, and various font engineering tasks. In contrast, AI tools have currently only been adopted by a minority of practitioners, and are largely being used for adjacent tasks such as writing code, gathering project documentation, or generating proofing strings. The majority of respondents expressed strong resistance to automating what they identify as the creative core of their work (e.g., sketching, drafting a basic alphabet, marking proofs), but show willingness to delegate the most labor-intensive, technical operations to software, with kerning repeatedly identified as the leading candidate for further automation—provided that human oversight and decision making remain throughout the process. Ethical concerns (such as training data provenance, lack of transparency, and environmental costs) lead to a cautious attitude towards generative AI, a position also fueled by some expressed anxieties about corporate concentration. We argue that sustainable and worthwhile innovation in typeface design should prioritize assistive tools that are transparent and encourage human decision-making, in order to optimize routine work without compromising iterative practices through which designers acquire judgement. Such tools would ideally balance streamlined workflows with the acquisition and reinforcement of highly specific skills, which in turn enable designers to preserve qualitative typographic standards.
Implications for practice: The integration of automation and artificial intelligence within type design should serve to augment designers’ creative and critical agency. Automated processes can effectively support technical and repetitive tasks—such as spacing, proofing, and data handling—allowing practitioners to concentrate on conceptual and aesthetic decision-making. Transparency and user control are central to this relationship; systems must remain interpretable and open to designer intervention. Ethical considerations warrant continued professional attention as automation becomes pervasive. Collaboration among designers, educators, and developers will be essential to ensure that emerging tools are aligned with the discipline’s values of craft, intentionality, and typographic quality. Sustained engagement with scripting and AI literacy will empower designers to critically shape automated systems within their evolving practice.
Keywords: artificial intelligence; creative practice; ethics; intellectual property; type design
DOI being generated
Cite this article:
Savoie, A., Bernau, K., Daly, W., Haefliger, R., & Baez-Lugo, S. (2026). Automation and artificial intelligence in the type design process: Insights from an industry survey. Visible Language, 60(1), 24–57. https://www.visible-language.org/journal/issue-60-1-automation-type-design
First published online April 26, 2026. © 2026 Visible Language — this article is open access, published under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.
https://www.visible-language.org/journal
Visible Language Consortium:
University of Leeds (UK)
University of Cincinnati (USA)
North Carolina State University (USA)