New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
A Kind Of
Posted by gregorycadars in
7 Mar 2002 — 2:05pm
7 Mar 2002 — 2:05pm
:: An attempt to make a bold typeface.
I'm not sure of the 9 pixel version... 
User login
Support our Sponsors
8 Mar 2002 — 3:42pm
Hi Greg!
Yeah! try with versalitas men, it`s a pretty cool one, any regular version?
Miguel.
10 Mar 2002 — 10:40pm
hey
very nice so nice i am need a download of it
signed
IN NEED
13 Mar 2002 — 5:03pm
Concerning readability:
It's a largely (and intentionally?) ignored fact that 2-pixel stems are better than 1-pixel stems, at current mainstream PPEMs.
hhp
14 Mar 2002 — 2:10am
greg:
i have a sketch of a very similar bitmap family which i wanted to produce, and now you've gone and done it better than i could have... congratulations, it's great...
20 Mar 2002 — 8:41am
Sample text is part of the conclusion from "A Comparison of Popular Online Fonts"
http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/41/onlinetext.htm
20 Mar 2002 — 11:57am
are you going to distribute this font family ?
i'd love to have it
20 Mar 2002 — 4:36pm
Looking nice! I think the Thin-Ten and the Reg-Ten & -Eleven work best. Could you possibly put up that paragraph set in Reg-Eleven-"Bold" as well?
hhp
21 Mar 2002 — 12:23am
this is a great screen font family...
i really like the thin versions...
nice one...
21 Mar 2002 — 7:51am
Thanks!
Is it just me, or is this more readable than its non-Bold?
hhp
21 Mar 2002 — 9:51am
Hrant and his two pixel stem widths...
21 Mar 2002 — 10:15am
Dude, please just answer the question! ;-)
Anyway, one pixel or two, this is one cool bitmap font.
hhp
21 Mar 2002 — 10:26am
Hehe. Ok, I agree here. The REG Bold 11 is the
easiest of the set to read. Though, I'm most
impressed with the readability of the THIN 9.
I have some trouble with the 'e' in REG 10.
Stephen
21 Mar 2002 — 11:01am
I've tried a different 'e'. You're right, Stephen, it seems working better.
21 Mar 2002 — 11:19am
Yes. I think you've sacrificed a bit of
consistency of style for readability.
For a bitmap, I think it's a fair trade.
Stephen
26 Mar 2002 — 7:37am
Thanks for all your constructive
comments, this is the definitive
version. It's dev' time now!
Greg.
26 Mar 2002 — 7:45am
wonderful... Can't really say anything else
15 May 2002 — 7:48am
what a fantastic family, they seem so happy together
you might be featured in the next version of "A Comparison of Popular Online Fonts"..
30 Jul 2002 — 10:41pm
this is a beautiful font family. well done.
11 Mar 2002 — 3:12pm
Ok here's the Kind(?) complete family.
I am not sure this Uc N as reversed U is a good idea... your comments are welcome.
13 Mar 2002 — 4:54pm
Beautiful. It has a nice Bayer flavor. It's a
rare gem of a bitmap where multiple sizes and
weights feel like a cohesive family.
The U and V seem very close. Perhaps the U needs
a stem.
I see you're using Verdana-like widths for
the 'regular' weight--great for readability. The
'thin' set is very nice. As much as I like
Verdana, I've often wished it had a more elegant
set, that wasn't so clunky (New Yorker's would
say horsey) at 11pt.
I'd love to see a text setting... even if it's in
French.
My humble plea: sell this to Microsoft so
they can distribute it freely with their browser.
It would make the Web a much better place.
21 Mar 2002 — 6:42am
Hrant, that's for you.
