Fontibon

CFCG's picture

Fontibón is based on Ed Benguiat’s (1975) Bauhaus. Moving away from Herbert Bayer’s strong influence, as a result, I am trying to obtain a Grotesque Sans, high contrast between traces and that it looks as if it was made with a paintbrush. This gives it humanistic features and a soft and femenine look. Any comments would be appreciated.

Thanks!


Carlos Fabián Camargo G.

Yehan's picture

Hi Carlos, thank you for the mail. I'm no expert, but I think it's an interesting take on what is an unusual source. I understand the spaces on the a, b and e which you've chosen not to join, following the example of bauhaus, but I'm thinking that it would really make it easier to read if they were joined.

Are you thinking of making other weights? I would really like to see a light version of this...

Dav's picture

Whoa. Niiice. I love it. (I especially like the 'e'.)

This seems like such a fabulous revival and reinterpretation of 'Bauhaus'. Adding a much needed human and handcrafted touch to the geometric constructed 'original'. Sooo smooth. Like the cute, little sister of the 'Bauhaus' bully. ;)

sim's picture

I find that pretty interesting, but one letter bugs me. I think is the way you choose to draw the a. Did you try to design a double storey a. I wonder if it would be nice to have that type of a.I also notice your caps (F) seems higher than the lower case. Is that the way you choose. I would try increase the stem of the lower case or decrease the caps. Keep going.

fabian's picture

New corrections:


Please Download pdf/example

All your news comments and corrections will be very helpful. Thanks for your help!


Carlos Fabián Camargo G.

Tomi from Suomi's picture

Hello, Carlos-

In all, that's a great take on a Bauhaus, and a very good execution of that idea. There are a couple of things that catched my eye: the arm of the 'r' looks a bit thin, so I would fatten that up. And I would also fatten the open connection of 'a', 'b' and 'e' etc.; I like that you kept that feature of Bauhaus, but in Bauhaus that open part is on a straight line, yours is rounded, so I would compensate that with fattening those parts to enhance the readability.

But in all, a great typeface.

klepas's picture

It’s looking and coming along great. The only thoughts on I can think of are the slanting to the right that seem to be inherent in the strokes of the e and 6, particularly when comparing the 6 its cousin, the 9. :)

Great work—keep it up.

Kaffee und Kuchen

sim's picture

Fabian,

Congratulations for Fontibón. I've noticed on your last version you modified the a where de stem join the bowl. I find the new a pretty nice.

Great work and good luck.

André

fabian's picture

Thanks for your comment guys, I'm working on a script that works garnished to Fontibon. The mentioned script is quite different, it could be used to write short words or phrases. Here are some samples, what do you think?

All your news comments and corrections will be very helpful.
Thanks for your help!


Carlos Fabián Camargo G.

evertype's picture

The shape of the acute accent is pleasing. (We think about this in Ireland.)

Michael Everson
evertype.com

Yehan's picture

It's really coming together nicely. The script looks a little "choppy" but otherwise it's fine. Maybe work on the "s"? and a non swash-y "g"?

Goran Soderstrom's picture

Fabian, since you asked personally for comments, here we go ;-)

I am looking at the PDF from 7th of february, in case you already corrected anything.

UPPERCASE

• Left stem on A feels a little thick, compare it to a straight stem, the goal is to make them look equally thick, or if you are using the contrast method (like serif fonts) when two diagonal stems are in the same letters (like A, V, W) you should have a system for this. Normally the right stem is a little thicker on A in that case (as from the broadpen), and opposite on V, W.

• W is a litte bit thick in the middle part, it needs more white space there.

• T is higher than S – perhaps it has jumped up a little bit?

• B – perhaps it could be a little less wide?

• M – I think I would try to make the vertical stems a little bit thinner, just to see if it is better or not.

• N – same as M

• X and Y – if you compare the left diagonal stems you'lll see that Y is thicker, they should have the same visual thickness I think.

• Tail on R – a little to heavy, I believe.

LOWERCASE
w – same problems as W (use same system also for all glyphs with diagonal stems). Maybe it is a little to wide aswell?

k – tail to heavy

j & g – perhaps a little to heavy tails

e – perhaps this e should be a stylistic alternate and a closed one as default?

z - to heavy diagonal

t – a little to high ascender

x – feels to thick

s – the lowercase have another touch than the uppercase S - I think you should make them similar.

c - a little wide and too squarish? could be narrower

m – a little wide, could be narrower?

OTHER

period – feels a little weak, comma is better

Generally the spacing looks a little bit strange (especially on the lowercase), try to have as few values as possible. Start by letting all similar shapes (o, c, p, q, q etc) share the same sidebearing on the round parts, for example. The same goes for all the straight stems. Then work similar on all letters. Try to find connections. This makes the whole process easier when you are kerning later on also and can use class based kerning in a good way.
Last but not least – you have a good concept and you followed it well – now it's all about polishing details and making some more decisions.
Keep up the good work!

Syndicate content Syndicate content