<i>Krulleletters</i> and Bruin Cafes in Amsterdam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article addresses lettering and signpainting as an important element of visual culture. Following the model of scholarly studies grounded in typographic and architectural history, the article focuses on a set of Amsterdam shop signs painted in a style identified as Krulleletters (“curly letters”), typically associated with the city's bruin cafes (“brown cafes”). The analysis presents this elegant writing as related to a local tradition, and positions it within its social and cultural context in order to explain its visual relevance. Broadly based on Dutch Mannerist calligraphy of the seventeenth century, the Krulleletters appeared for the first time in the early 1950s, probably the creation of lettering artist J.W.J. Visser. The style was soon imitated and, over the last thirty years, owing notably to the work of signpainter Leo Beukeboom, it gradually established a “new” graphic tradition. Krulleletters are visible on numerous cafe windows around Amsterdam, thereby contributing to the city's visual identity. Next to examining its formal attributes and origins, the authors document the typical trade practice of lettering artists, at a time when this craft is rapidly disappearing from urban centers under pressure from the now ubiquitous die-cut vinyl technology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".