Dutch baroque book font, Cyrillic and Greek scripts, italic

Primary tabs

72 posts / 0 new
Last post
Max Phillips's picture
Offline
Joined: 21 Nov 2010 - 9:43pm
0

Late to the party. This has really evolved with stunning speed into a very elegant and readable face. Well done!

Eye of the g looks a little light to me. And while a matching bold in a face of this vintage will always look just a little anachronistic (at least to me), I think your bold would seem less algorithm-y if it had more thick/thin contrast.

Jan Żurawski's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2005 - 12:21pm
0

Thanks for your encouragement!
"Late to the party" - then you can see it from very first clumsy drawings :) Slowly all that mess becoming a face - not a set of letters.
"g" now looks that way:
I will think abut it.
BTW I needed bold as my browser uses this font and artificial bold looks terribly, so better this one than nothing. Of course it is not a way to make a finished font...
And thanks all again.

Gary Lonergan's picture
Offline
Joined: 2 Jan 2007 - 3:04pm
0

HI Jan What I meant was did the computer alone make your bold whichI now know is not the the case. Have you tried making a mm font and generating instances to see which bold is strong enough to stand out, but can also be used as an independent face.

Jan Żurawski's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2005 - 12:21pm
0

"did the computer alone make your bold" No, particularly the result in one cycle is not good, much better in three smaller.
"Have you tried making a mm font" No, I tried the function "Merge fonts". MM seems very complicated and don't work for me in FontForge :(
My trial run:
The third is extrapolation between Medium and Bold > Thin (a bit fishy)

Gary Lonergan's picture
Offline
Joined: 2 Jan 2007 - 3:04pm
0

Middle weight is best. The top looks like it's an unedited computer generated bold. Would you say you have kept the original feeling of your type? I'm not sure. I'm running into the same problems myself.

Jan Żurawski's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2005 - 12:21pm
0

"The top looks like it's an unedited computer generated bold" because it is.
It is a reference when I want to make slight variations of my basic font, and as such works quite well. I'm planning to edit/polish the Bold to the real thing and then I will be able to generate any weight between Book and Bold plus even extrapolated Light(not as extreme as this one above).

Briän M Zick's picture
Offline
Joined: 8 Nov 2008 - 9:38pm
0

I was also unable to get MM to work in Fontforge... Can't anyone get it to work!

froo's picture
Offline
Joined: 2 Jun 2008 - 5:19am
0

I am not sure if the Light is a good idea, at least now. It is better to observe how the Regular behaves in real print, on various papers in different sizes. Your typeface has some contrast, and finding the minimal stroke width in the Light will be crucial, if the font has to be used in the real world.
It is great to have many weights, but I would see (as a designer, not a type designer) rather an UltraBlack, than Light in your font, if you want to go further than just making a revival.

Jan Żurawski's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2005 - 12:21pm
0

Thanks a million :)
First sketch of Greek script attached at the opening post.

Pablo Impallari's picture
Offline
Joined: 1 Feb 2010 - 1:12am
0

.

Briän M Zick's picture
Offline
Joined: 8 Nov 2008 - 9:38pm
0

spam !

Jan Żurawski's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2005 - 12:21pm
0

I made a CALT feature to resolve ugly f-space-T combination:
lookup caltlookup {
lookupflag 0;
sub [\f ]' [\space ] [\T ] by [f.altnarrow ];
} caltlookup;
see: http://typophile.com/node/90561

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

To me the neutered "f" is uglier (both functionally
and aesthetically) than the previous not-so-bad space.

hhp

Craig Eliason's picture
Online
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 - 1:44pm
0

I agree.

Jan Żurawski's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2005 - 12:21pm
0

OK. John Hudson made it right (and simple): small negative kerning space/T,W,V,X,Y and positive f/space.
BTW positive kerning is an oxymoron, I suppose.

Johan Palme's picture
Offline
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 - 6:07am
0

I'm slightly concerned by the apparent optical unevenness of the baseline, some of those overhangs might be too small or too large. Otherwise it's looking nice!

Jan Żurawski's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2005 - 12:21pm
0

Thanks, Johan!
It is shabby rendering. A bit spooked I checked it out:
Hope the baseline IS even... BTW the overshot is 12 for UC and 10 for lc. [1/1,000]

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Those overshoots at a bit modest for text sizes.

hhp

Jan Żurawski's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2005 - 12:21pm
0

I made quick research: 8 fonts designed for text, 5 fonts are in 8 to 11 band and 3 fonts in 14-23. So my font is in the mainstream; should be well. I belive, at least.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Yeah, could be, especially since you're x-height is small.
Could you name the fonts? I'm curious.

hhp

Jan Żurawski's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2005 - 12:21pm
0

Not details at hand as it didn't interest me then. The newest one - Brill 14/14, x-height 406, while mine 12/10 x-height 441.
BTW no such data somewhere? I'm curious too.