New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Create an account
Typophile RSS | More Feeds
This is my first attempt of creating a font and I am still at the beginning of the process. It is the physiognomy of the
Nice work, I think the old style numerals was a nice touch. Since you took this extra step why not go all out with tabular numerals as well.
This reminds me of an idea I started to work out on paper a while ago, though I was considering the effect when tracing the same path of the e with a slanted pen. The result wasn't that attractive when extended to the rest of the alphabet so I dropped it. I'm glad to see it works much better in a lineal design. I'd suggest extending the shape of the lower e to as many characters as you can. The results should be more distinctive and give your idea good mileage. Besides this, there are lots of problems in the shapes of your characters. The a is too wide. Assuming the e is your mothership character, the bowl characters bpdq are too narrow. The arm of the f extends too far to the right. The dot on the j is too high or the dot on the i is too low. They should be the same height. The v is too narrow. The w needs to be redrawn to bring the slopes into agreement. The t needs attention. The crossbar is too high, it should be at the same height as the crossbar on the f. The top of the stem on t is also much higher than is conventional. Additionaly, the shape of the foot is not advisable; I've tried this shape before and it never sits well on the baseline. Perhaps you could make this foot the same shape as the bottom half of the e. I like your idea for the distinctive bend in e. If applied with care to the rest of the alphabet, it could give you a distinct feel. But I'd be careful about getting too carried away with exprimentation; it'd be best to first nail the conventional san serif shapes and then work from there to inject your ideas.
my quick comments: - descenders are too long; - g looks like q; - M is too wide; - middle-arms in EF are too high and thin; - there's a lot of width and stroke weight variations...
Well, I didn