Near-Perfect Typefaces

Trevor Baum's picture

We all know that there's no such thing as perfection, and that applies just as well in the world of type design. But what are some typefaces that come close if it wasn't for one little thing (one character, the italics, usability, numerals, etc)?

Examples:

Baskerville would be a perfect typeface if only its 'a' wasn't so wide and round.
Univers would be a perfect typeface if only it had small caps.
Futura would be a perfect typeface if only its ascenders weren't so weirdly tall.
Miller would be a perfect typeface if only it's 'k' didn't have a curved leg.

Have at it!

.00's picture

WTFC

riccard0's picture

WTFC

Well, for one, the similar thread I linked to spawned several interesting discussions. And, for another, I’m sure several new great typefaces were born when someone started thinking along the lines of “I love this typeface, but I can’t stand its [insert the feature of your choice]. I bet I can do better!”.

.00's picture

NIRDGAF

blank's picture

Avenir would look better if only it had the M from Gill Sans. Now where have I seen that…

quadibloc's picture

Century Expanded would be a perfect typeface if only it were a little less condensed.
Imprint would be a perfect typeface if the capital J didn't descend below the line.
Garamond would be a perfect typeface if the capital J didn't descend below the line, and the counter on the lowercase e were larger.
Times Roman would be a perfect typeface if only everyone else wasn't using it.

On the other hand, levity aside, and referring to the older thread referenced here, the serifs on the I in Bell Gothic are there for a reason - so that people reading something in it can, easily and unambiguously, in all cases, tell I, l, and 1 apart with no chance of error. This was a good idea for a typeface for setting telephone books.

paul d hunt's picture

HEORERKERJ!

.00's picture

when I was younger: JDOTRWS

now: SGAOTRWW

dezcom's picture

IPCFTWBB

dezcom's picture

An Act of Pure Genius
A very perfectly dressed man stands next to you on a crowded subway. From your vantage point just above his left shoulder, you notice a small bit of lint disturbing the otherwise astonishingly flawless appearance. While his head is turned away, you flick the lint off of his lapel without him ever noticing.

At your stop, you leave the train with the full knowledge that, on this day, you have achieved a perfection which was solely due to your amazing skill and superior perspective.

hrant's picture

Personally I never see only a small flaw in anything - it's always that I want to change a bunch of things.

EXCEPT for the one thing I have never been able to figure out how to improve in any way at all: the Yin/Yang symbol.

hhp

dezcom's picture

I never look at other people's work with the thought of it being something for me to fix. I would much rather let it be what is is or was to them. I have more than enough fixing to do on my own work and don't seem to be getting very far with that ;-)

Syndicate content Syndicate content