Looks handdrawn, I’m afraid.

Please upload the photos to Typophile.

Some people can’t view images saved to a file/photo sharing site because they’re blocked at work.

If you want another opnion, I agree with Jan — this looks like it is hand-drawn. The ’s’ seems too large, and the h’s seem not to be exactly identical. The ’r’ is an odd style, and I found very few scripts with a printed-but-connected letterform such as this. The original version of Signal had a similar ’r’ (shown in the Jaspert ’Encyclopaedia of Type Faces’), but the Berthold digital version of Signal does not. In fact, the only script I could find with this sort of ’r’ is Roman Script, and it is a vertical script, with no other resemblance to this sample.

The ’F’ is not like any other script F I can recall.

The two most similar fonts I found to the look of this sample, and it’s just my viewpoint, are Mandate (a.k.a. Freehand 521) and Monoline Script.

- Mike Yanega

Mike-

My initial reaction to this ’font’ was exactly the same as you described above ^^^.
Only conclusion I didn’t come to was that it was probably hand drawn and thus not an actual typeface at all. I think you’re right. The letters just don’t make sense otherwise.

Well, now I know I can stop wasting time searching for a non-exsistant font, and begin the ever so tedious character tracing. My hand will be cramped up after work today, that’s for sure. sigh

Thanks for the advice, guys!
very helpful!

-Amanda