CFCG's picture

Hi everybody,

Escuadra was inspired in the font used by the architects in their drawings when computers were not created yet and they had to use chinese ink to label their plans. Any comments and criticisms would be most welcome.


Carlos Fabián Camargo G.

Stephen Coles's picture

Isonorm with a modulated stroke, eh? It's interesting in some of the letters, but you may want to vary a bit more from your inspiration where it doesn't work well, especially the 'm'.

TBiddy's picture

I agree that the "m" is not yet working. In keeping with the consistency of your design...your "v" strokes shouldn't be the same width.

To me I'd need to see more glyphs before I can really judge or critique this design. Like some capital letters and numbers perhaps?

Cesar Puertas's picture

The concept of Escuadra seems very good to me, but I find problems in some letters. The "m" might be slightly narrower and its middle stroke should be straight so that it doesn't pull to the left. I find problems vith the "v" also, since there should be some contrast but there's not any.

The general proportions are ok but I'd try not to force the curves so much. The grid still seems too evident to me.

Scott Leyes's picture

I see the dot of the "i" as a distraction -- awfully heavy, doesn't seem to line up with anything (other than it's own stroke). Perhaps it should be as thin as the horizontal strokes?

The counter of the "e" also seems a bit heavy... with such a large x-heght, all the other letters are high-waisted (pants pulled up around their chests), but the "e" goes in the opposite direction with a low crossbar.

Very nice, though... reminds me a little of Radiant, which I worked on (a version of) many years ago. You might check it out (the light weights) for inspiration.

elsebra's picture

(English below spanish)

¡Hola Carlos!
¡Una vez más incursionando en el mundo del diseño de letras! Admiro tu constancia y lamento no tener yo mismo algo de ella. Te felicito, una vez más.

Te digo mi humilde opinión acerca de lo que veo:

- No queda mucho de la esencia de las letras en las que te basás (si es que ellas son, como creo, las grisadas de la parte superior de la imagen). Como si Escuadra no surgiera de donde en verdad surge. La forma de los caracteres que estás trabajando no guardan demasiada relación con sus "ancestros". Esto no es una crítica, sólo que me llamó la atención que en tu dibujo se pierda parte del espíritu que los generó (caracteres usados por los arquitectos cuando no se había inventado la computadora).
- Veo un interletrado muy estrecho.
- Acuerdo con biddy, quien te dice que la 'm' no está funcionando correctamente.
- Las ascendentes quizá sean demasiado cortas, no lo sé.
- La 'f' quizá debería tener un ascendente menos "geométrico" y más ajustado ópticamente.
- Relacionado con lo anterior: pareciera que la fuente pide ajustes ópticos. Algunas modulaciones se me aparecen extrañas a los ojos: como si el trazo fino se destacara más de la cuenta y hubiera que atenuar esa diferencia. No sé si me explico bien...
- La ISONORM es una buen ejemplo para estudiar, creo que vale el comentario de Stephen Coles. (El punto de la 'i' quizá encuentre solución a partir de ver cómo se resuelve en esa fuente)

Por ahora no veo mucho más.
¡Espero haberte ayudado y que nos tengas al tanto de los avances!

Abrazo desde Argentina,


/ / / / / / / / /

Hello Carlos!
Facing into the world of the letterdesign once again!
I certainly admire you and I'm sorry that I have not something of your perseverance. I congratulate you, once again!

Here's my humble opinion about what I see:
- Escuadra isn't left to much of the essence of the letters in which you actually based your work (if it is that they are, as I believe, the grey ones of the superior part of the image). As if Escuadra didn't come from where it really comes. The character forms that you are working doesn't show too much relation to their "ancestors". This is not a critic, only that called my attention that your drawing loses part of the spirit who generated them (characters used by the architects when the computer had not invented yet, as you say).
- I see a very narrow kerning.
- I agree with biddy, that says to you that 'm' isn't working correctly.
- Perhaps the ascendants are too short, I don't know...
- Perhaps 'f' must have an ascendant less "geometric" and more optically adjusted.
- Related to the previous thing: it seemed that the font requests optical adjustments. Some modulations appear strange to my eyes: as if the fine outline stood out more of the account and was necessary to attenuate that difference. I do not know if I explain myself well...
- ISONORM is a good example to study, I believe that it is worth the commentary of Stephen Coles. perhaps (maybe dot of 'i' finds a solution from seeing how it is solved in that font)

I don't see much more.
I wish I helped.

Waiting to see the advances,
best regards from Argentina,


CFCG's picture

Hi everyone,

Thanks a lot for the isonorm link. I didn’t know that font exists. The research I been doing until now has been limited to the information in this industrial labeling guide:


I agreed with you, the “m” needs more work.

You are right; the “v” is extremely heavy.

Your comments about the “i” and “e” made me reconsider several issues about them. Your comment about the x height made me reconsider as well.

You are right. The original idea was getting lost. Although what I want to do is to interpret that original idea in a different way. I wish to redesign each letter but not making an exact copy of the industrial labeling.

I agree as well with your comments regarding: letter spacing, ascending height and “f” ascendant to be less geometric.

Subsequently you can find new corrections:


I will appreciate if you could check them and let me know any comments or suggestions you may have


Carlos Fabián Camargo G.

elsebra's picture

¡MUCHO MEJOR! ¡Buen avance!

I like it pretty much!



Cesar Puertas's picture

Is the slight contrast fully intentional? In my opinion, the industrial look you want could be achieved more easily if the strokes seemed monolinear. The "h" and the "b" are too wide for my taste. The "v" is still out of the concept, but its low contrast is consistent with the industrial look you're after. The lower stroke of the "e" is too short. The "m" is too complex in comparison with the other letters.

¿Es intencional el contraste? En mi opinión, el "look" industrial que busca podría conseguirse más facilmente si los trazos fueran monolineales. En cuanto a proporciones, la "h" y la "b" me parecen muy anchas. La "v" sigue viéndose fuera del concepto, pero su ausencia de contraste me parece consistente con el look industrial perseguido. El trazo inferior de la "e" me parece demasiado corto. La "m" es muy compleja en comparación con las demás.

César Puertas
diseñador (tipo)gráfico

litera's picture

The second version of your font is a great improvement toward usability. I can see commercial use for this family.

My opinions and suggestions:

  • The "h" is definitely too wide. You also presented two different "u"s. The first one (after "b") is wider than the second one (after "g"). Use the second one (width and style are correct) and also adjust "h" to the same width.
  • You will have to adjust "b" but maybe not as much as "h"
  • "m" works better but still needs some work. Try making the first curve less round.
  • You will have to change the "g" to be more like the rest ("b" and "h" may be a starting point). You will probably change the lower part of the bowl to go upwards like with "a".
  • "r" is beautiful. I like it VERY much. Pointing a little bit down.
  • "f" probably needs some work on the top.
  • Letter "t" doesn't really look like it's part of the same family.
  • The right stem of the "v" could be slightly curvy. Try that to make it more family like.
  • "o" is a bit too light compared to the others especially to the neighbouring "n". So is "s".
  • Try a round dot on the "i" or "rounded" dot.

This looks like a really promising font. I like it very much. You're getting there. Keep up the GREAT work.

CFCG's picture

Hi everybody,

Thanks for all your time. Lately, I have been taken up again this font and I have been thinking on some styles. Subsequently you can find new modifications. Your comments are welcome as always.


Carlos Fabián Camargo G.

jupiterboy's picture

This ultra light version is very interesting. The second version with the modified “m” was starting to remind me of Etelka a bit. Now in the ultra light I see its own character emerging more. Look at the caps and consolidate the vocabulary of curves in the “G”, “B”, and consider extending the foot of the “R” slightly. The “a” and “e” look very solid to me.

Syndicate content Syndicate content