New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Type ID my new RADAR logotype font?
Posted by wormwood in
10 Jun 2007 — 12:08pm
10 Jun 2007 — 12:08pm
I thought this would be an interesting variation on the usual type ID.
I often pixel sketch initial design ideas but obviously I will do the finished version of this logotype as vectors. I was wondering if there is already a font with similar letterforms. I thought the R and A would be enough for an ID.
It seems too obvious not to already exist, but if it does have any originality do you think it would be worth developing into a full typeface or have I just reinvented a wheel?
User login
Support our Sponsors
10 Jun 2007 — 12:25pm
Jon,
i really like this... it kinda reminds me of a font called 'Bubble' that i have seen in an old type specimen book and House Industries Chalet the 70-cut. But this is somewhat more elegant.
Seb
10 Jun 2007 — 1:47pm
It has a familiar look too it. Like a mix between Platelet and Base Nine.
10 Jun 2007 — 4:10pm
No, this is good I really like it. Don't worry if it's a bit similar, it's always going to be similar to something. I really like it tracked out like that, it's got a 50's world fair look about it, space travel for civilians, self-cleaning kitchens, optimism, but it still looks contemp. and stylish. Nice work.
--N
10 Jun 2007 — 4:44pm
I have to second Nicholasgross on not having to worry about any possible similarities to existing fonts. Honoustly, a wheel can only be invented once, but it's what you do with the existing idea that can make all the difference. Your specimen shows a lot of potential & I for one think it's definitely worth further development. I recently wrote a whole text about how innovation is far too overrated in my opinion (pretty much everything has been done at least once somewhere before) & what makes a true artist is how he/she combines all existing elements to a personal & interesting whole. Maybe I wrote the whole thing from a kind of selfdefensive position, but mainly because I hàte it when people only judge things by their originality (and I don't really like being called creative in that view because of a certain connotation the word has gotten by now). But I'm drifting off from what I really wanted to say... My conclusion & advice: GO FOR IT! ;-)
10 Jun 2007 — 4:48pm
BTW, drduckling was really worried about your temporary absence so you might want to send her a relieving note if you haven't done so yet ;-)
10 Jun 2007 — 6:03pm
I love it!!!
11 Jun 2007 — 10:14am
Thanks, everyone, for all the feedback and ID suggestions.
Bit of a shame it was all so positive :-/ Criticism is often more helpful.
Chalet New York 1970 is possibly the most similar ID suggestion and Asvetic's suggestions come close in a few places too. But, yeah, I think there's enough differences to make 'Radar' worth developing. If I can find the time.
Nicholasgross - I'm glad you got a retro futurist vibe from it. That's exactly what I was aiming for with this logotype. It's for branding a chair design which has a 50/60's feel about. It's all curves and made from tinted translucent plastic in a range of groovy colours.
Anyone feel like collaborating on this font? I can do the vectors and you can do the tedious font work. I guess I envisage 'Radar' as just an all caps display font; unless someone want's to try a lowercase.
11 Jun 2007 — 10:15am
Nicholasgross - I did this graphic for you to stick on your kitchen appliances. It will make you feel like you're living in the future. With the Jetsons :)
11 Jun 2007 — 5:05pm
Gosh! thanks Jon that sure looks swell! You're a peach ;) (sorry that's my best attempt at 1950s American speak, I'm Australian so it's still a bit of a stretch)
no thanks really it looks great
--N
12 Jun 2007 — 5:56am
Nao probs cobber. (my best Australian :)
12 Jun 2007 — 4:14pm
That's actually not too bad... instead of cobber, you could insert digger, cock, cob, big guy, chief, mate, matey. Although no worries, no wuzzers is probably a bit more Australian than no probs
--N
12 Jun 2007 — 4:58pm
Yee's me mate!
Something like that?