Sans Type Feedback

lecter's picture

Hello everybody,
I’m designing a sans-serif and wonder if I might get any input from the pro’s.
It’s got more or less two weights right now, and you can test it in this typetester here:

http://www.doubletwo.net/MiloTest/Index.html

I would be very pleased if you got some feedback for me.

lec

And please ignore the name "Milo", I know there is a typeface out there with that name. This was the first came into my mind so it’s a kind of workingtitle.

cerulean's picture

It's good. The Black b,d,p,q seem condensed and would be more in character if you let the bowl out some.

litera's picture

It feels a bit wide to me because it seems as if it was stretched horizontally. But otherwise looks very nice.

lecter's picture

Yes right, the Black b,d,p,q can take a little, did not see that. It is a very rough first cut, I just followed what came up... I'm trying to fix this.

And yes litera, you are right, it seems a little too wide. Maybe I try to narrow some characters to get closer to the b,d,p,q. Or does the Thin seem wide to you too?

I am planning some condensed and maybe ultra-condensed weights too. I want to try out the whole range of multiple master functionality.

And i am not sure with the dot above the i and j and rounded punctuation. Maybe squarish would be better for that?

Birdseeding's picture

Good-looking stuff generally. I would definitely have a look again at the /g/ in the black version - considering your carefully-crafted colour correction (maybe on the verge of being too thinned) on the /N/, that ear is way too heavy, and the link feels a bit weak.

I'd also have another look at the various white sections, again problematic in /g/ but also feeling a bit weird in many other bowled letters in the black. In the /e/, for instance, it looks optically futher left than the tail. In the /b/ and /d/ it feels diagonally leaned.

One thing you seriously need to go through, in both weights, is the baseline appearance - some letters (notably thin /t/) have too much overhang, while others, like thin /O/, have too little.

lecter's picture

Thanks, all good points.
Yes, i corrected the /N/ because it was way too heavy, maybe little too strong. :)
And you are right with the bowls... i'll check that.

In deed I did not looked closer at the baseline, very good tip.

litera's picture

Yes both weights. /o/ in either weight seems to have perfect width. Most of the others are just too wide.

1985's picture

lecter what is the technology behind the site, if you don't mind me asking?
And are you making changes to the active/linked font file?

I've not seen anyone put their fonts up for critique in this way :-)

My modest input: The counters in the black version seem very small. Letters such as the /c/ are quite different between weights, the light is much rounder. Some characters are necessarily different (/f/) but I think the /c/ could share some more DNA with it's light counterpart. Feel free to disagree.

litera's picture

@1985: Wow stupid of me! I didn't know the page was interactive! I though it's just an image of few letters. :)

@lecter: Very nice app. I'm interested in knowing as well.

BTW: Black seems a bit like a faux black with invalid shape contrast. I don't like it too much.

lecter's picture

oh, i thought the layout would explain the functionality for itself.
i'm a little into flash-actionscripting, so i thought it would be cool to create a simple display tool for showing my fonts. it would be cooler if i only had to put the fonts into a seperate folder or somthing but i have to embed them. but then its really nice i think. but there is a little bug its kind of limited to a maximum fontsize. i dont know what that comes from. gotta check that. (maybe ;))

btw: i have uploaded a newer version, have a look at that maybe its a bit better.
-> http://www.doubletwo.net/MiloTest2/Index.html

butterick's picture

And please ignore the name "Milo", I know there is a typeface out there with that name. This was the first came into my mind so it’s a kind of workingtitle.

If you want to name a font Milo in the privacy of your home, go nuts. But you shouldn't be putting a font out in public with the same name as a published font. Even if it's just a working title. Even if your font is still in development. Leaving aside the legal & trademark issues — this is basic good sportsmanship.

lecter's picture

Oh yeah, you are so damn right. Now, that i have googled it, i found one from FontFont and i see the sans is really close to mine... `:-/ i am very sorry for that! that wasnt my intent. i should have looked closer.

the only thing i found on my (maybe too quick) research was this here and i thought its forms were so far to mine that i will be ok.

http://www.urbanfonts.com/fonts/Milo.htm

arrg! can i change the threattitle somewhere?

Gary Lonergan's picture

It's a nice looking font I'm very impressed with the type tester
Cap X in the bold looks clumsy compared with the nicely worked inktraps in W and V
and the black does look to have counters that will close up in small sizes.
Maybe interpolate and make it a bit lighter.

Syndicate content Syndicate content