Number3Pencils's picture

Good evening!

This font is based from memory off of a poster that my grandparents in West Virginia have; I haven't actually seen the poster for a few years because each time I'm there I forget to look at it. It's some interesting geometric art, including the text

mcgaw editions

in this lettering. (It also has an alternate, much thinner c and s that I will make soon.) I discovered that "McGaw Editions" is a company that makes posters, but when I emailed them to ask if they could tell me about that particular one, they couldn't find it in their database. (I assume it's just old, and predates their digital age.) I think it was probably hand-drawn because (1) it's old and (2) I haven't been able to find anything similar, except for one that was similar but not it (I can't find it again or remember its name). Anyways, tell me what you think.

yoshiko1.pdf17.24 KB
samadam's picture

Very nice!
I like the lower case g, it has a nice compactness to it.
The contrast between the thin characters and the wider ones is huge, it adds a lot of character.
Not very easily read, but cool none the less.

SuperUltraFabulous's picture

I love these geometric faces of old. I wish they made they that one!!!


hrant's picture

Frankly I'm not sure why, but I think this has potential.
Something about the... terminals maybe, is making it special.

f: no good.
i/j: make dots round? In any case, align tops of dots with ascenders.
r: beak needs help.
s: some people will tell you to make the stroke weight distribution conventional; I suggest you smile and ignore them. But do make the bottom-right curve smoother.
p/q: it might actually make sense to make their descenders shorter than the others. Maybe the "j"'s too (although maybe not as short).
t: weak.
v: good idea, but a bit too full.

A: a bit TOO wide.
I: consider serifs.
J: flatten terminal shear.
L/T: too narrow.
Q: come on, live a little! :-)
S/V: same as in lc.
Y: unsure; maybe try using your "v" structure.

numerals: rationalist. niiice. The "one" is bril.

Pilcrow: dump the little bar in the middle of the stems. And you need more heft, somewhere - that's how a pilcrow works.
%: the bar is cool, but flatten it.
&: thmooooz.
#: I can dig it.
[/]: longer bars, probably.
(/): wishful thinking - too much like square brackets.
guillemets: make more angular.
cedilla: out of character.
accents: the ring is bril, the diaeresis is OK, the rest are out of character.
$: nice.
Yen: I'd use one bar; if not, lower them.
BP: not working. Try a smaller top.
eszet: squashed head. Let it be what it needs to be.

Spacing: too tight; the stem-stems are bunching.


SuperUltraFabulous's picture

hrant> I love your thoroughness!

paul d hunt's picture

my personal feelings:
the spacing is toooooooooooo tight. it could be loosened, if even just a tad.
the ascenders are toooooooooooo short. even a slight bit of adjustment would help readability. i kept reading the d as an a.

Miss Tiffany's picture

too loose and it will lose its charm. this could never be a text-face or even a subhead-face, but as a display-face it has some retro promise.

piccic's picture

I think Paul is right about the ascenders. Tiffany is quite right, too, but a little more unevenness would make it more lively. Hrant is right about the numerals as well: their style is a counterpoint to most of the letters' one.

My idea: heighten the ascenders a little, differentiate a bit some forms to get rid of an excessive homogeneous quality. Don't know how to do it without loosing the general feeling, anyway.

Syndicate content Syndicate content