Humanist Sans, feedback needed

sesch's picture

Hello everybody!!

I'm working on my first font, please share some advices about the progress of my neohumanist sanserif. Thanks

AttachmentSize
sesch glyphs_1.pdf158.01 KB
spanish typeset.pdf175.2 KB
sesch glyphs_1.1.pdf83.11 KB
spanish typeset 1.1.pdf280.55 KB
light regular bold test.pdf63.38 KB
typeset 1.2.pdf34.91 KB
typeset 1.3.pdf505.53 KB
typeset 1.4.pdf294.96 KB
litera's picture

First? Is it really? REALLY?

Wow this definitely took me by surprise. This font looks very very good but PDF lacks some type set in this font to make better critique. It looks like a very nice sans body font. I don't know why but its stroke contrast reminds me of Optima even though they're not alike at all. And Optima... Boy that font was and still is popular.

I don't like /g/ because it resembles too much Meta and to my opinion doesn't really complement other letters. I guess it should be closed at the bottom.

There also seems to be a bit too much weight contrast between UC and lc.

/a/ top stroke seems to be a bit too angular compared to others.

I'm not so sure about the /CH/Ch/ch/ ligature. The connecting curve goes a bit too high into /H/h/ making it a bit wobbly. Someone might as weel read it as /OH/Oh/oh/ even though tops are not connected.

And since you've added some of those accented characters, why not include some more (čšžćđ) and make it even more usable throughout Europe?

Trevor Baum's picture

It looks like a handdrawn FF Meta.

sesch's picture

Thanks for the comments, I really appreciate your words. As soon as I can I'll be posting some updates about it.

sesch's picture

Hello.

I'm posting some raw typesetting , no kerning, no side bearing adjustments, just for checking the weight contrast. Please give me your comments about this.

eliason's picture

Acute accents could be moved rightward, especially over the /i/.
Tilde looks like it drops a bit as it goes left to right.
Interior contour of /?/ looks quite lumpy. Perhaps it's indecisive about whether it should be "broken" or smooth: it might be best to commit to one or the other solution more clearly. Same is true of /s/.
Ear of /g/ could use some curviness.
Is the stem at the top left of /p/ (and bottom right of /d/) too tight compared to letters like /r/ and /n/?

Bendy's picture

As Robert said, what a splendid first effort! There's a hint of Legato in there for me.

Take comments with a pinch of salt, I'm no authority on type design :)

I love the organic feel that the tapered stems give; however this seems to not be so pronounced on the VvWwXxYyZz. I think these should be slightly flared like the H for example, they look a bit straight.

Thick stroke of Xx is a bit heavy. Also I'd make these slightly wider and give the lighter stroke a bit of offset.

Tail of y could be a bit more confident, add a bit more colour. Foot of l likewise.

Mitres on joins of Zz look too rigid being vertical, I'd slant them slightly to blend in more with the 'organic' tone elsewhere.

N may be slightly too wide or too heavy. Bowl of P may need to be larger (bring the bottom of the bowl down a notch).

Inner curve of S has too much of a cusp at the top.

Looks like spacing needs work on the text sample.

Great.

1996type's picture

As the others already said, this is a great start! Not finished though! I'll come back here with some more feedback, but for now I'd just like to say that you should take all the advise you get here at heart and aim for perfection. Cheers and good luck!
Jasper

sesch's picture

Craig, Ben and Jasper: thanks for taking your time to share your opinions.
I'm already working on this improvements.

litera's picture

Seeing it set in a text block I can see many kerning problems as well as uniformity. That's one of the main pillars of any text font. Kerning should improve it considerably but some shape changes will improve it even more. Since glyphs are quite narrow you have to be careful to not set this font too tight because it could make it look stretched.

Is it just me or would anybody else remove the ear on /p/? And it also leans a bit to the right. Put it beside /r/ and you'll see because /r( has the opposite effect of leaning to the left a bit.

Anyway. After you solve spacing/kerning at least to some extend some details will become more apparent.

Continue your work. I suppose you've realised it is much work in making a font. But the rewards can be just as satisfying. Keep on doing it because you've started nicely.

sesch's picture

Hello, thanks for a great feedback, I'm posting some corrections:

I not sure about if there's a correct weight contrast between UC & lc yet.

The Glyphs /Ss/ I've decided to make the inner curves rounded but I don't know if that is a possible solution.

The text sample 1.1 has no kerning at all, just an adjustment in the horizontal metrics.

Give me your opinions about this changes I've made with your inputs.

Thanks.

litera's picture

UC&lc weight seems fine.

I wanted to complain about the erroneous looking /Ss/ glyphs but since you've smoothed them out I don't have anything else to say.

I can see you've made a more appropriate /g/. It's just that it's a tiny bit too heavy compared to others.

Right stroke of /y/ seems thinner than left one. And the whole shape is maybe not as finished as it should be. I know... /y/ although seemingly trivial is rather quite a hard glyph to make.

Maybe I wasn't looking close enough because I couldn't find /x/ in your text, because I think it's a bit wide for its shape.

Id also make /D/ a bit less wide as well. Because of it's big fat bowl and straight stem it looks quite wide. A little wide. Test it in text and see for yourself whether it actually is wider than others.

Compared to the nice slight stroke contrast some characters look a bit odd. And those would be /vwxy/ and potentially also /z/, but the last one is not that bad because of angular corner cut. The same UC letters seem a bit thinner compared to others.

And try this: Since /R/ is much wider at the bottom, maybe some difference could also benefit /K/. Not as strong, but making it less vertically symmetric could benefit its shape.

But apart from these glyph shapes I'm not going to say anything about kerning yet because that is still to come.

I find your upgrade from 1.0 to 1.1 a very positive change in the right direction.

sesch's picture

Thanks Robert.

sesch's picture

Hello Typophiles.

I'm still struggling with /v/ /w/ /x/ /y/ & /z/ I've been making some changes in the glyphs but I'm not sure yet. Also I've uploaded the light & bold first drawings . Please check this and share your opinions.

Thanks!!

Gary Lonergan's picture

Looking at the word hamburgerfonts in light medium and bold. Its a very nice type with a cut paper feel
Some features in the light become obtrusive in the bold like the top of the ear in g has 2 straights whereas a curve might be better. I'd also try thickening the terminals on s. The a which looks fine in the light is getting a bit rowdy in the bold. But I'm really being picky it's a great effort so keep going with it.

sesch's picture

Thanks Gary!!!

sesch's picture

Hello typophiles.

I'm working on the kerning and spacing process, this is still so far from being good but it would be great to hear your comments about this decisions.

Thanks.

sesch's picture

I'm using KERNKING from Leslie Cabarga for text sample. But for now i'm only with small caps.

sesch's picture

New pdf attached to the first post.

Gary Lonergan's picture

Nice work: To my eye the colour looks quite even now. I think some of the round terminals don't go with the cut paper incised quality of this face especially top of p – Perhaps q could do with being taller on the right – did you try an o and g with a modulated sharp interior angle as in /b/d/p/q/– and / j/ is heavier at the bottom but doesn't need to be because of it has a descender. It's interesting that this hand drawn paper quality cut quality disappears in small sizes. Keep going

sesch's picture

Thanks Gary.

This is a quick change on the terminal of /p/

sesch's picture

About the /o/ and /g/ modulated sharp interior angle I've been trying so hard, but I didn't found the way to make it right even with /s/ was the same.

sesch's picture

I've corrected some spacing in the font and I've added some ligatures to the text sample in Typeset 1.4

sesch's picture


I'm not sure if all the terminals should have this shape but I like it!

Syndicate content Syndicate content