I'd start by moving the 'C' and 'O' a little nearer the M, as you've got round meeting flat on the left of the 'M' and flat meeting flat on it's right. This means the 'O' has to cosy up nearer than the 'L' in order to look right. Then, based on that, you'll be able to see whether your 'C' and 'O' need adjustment.
I'm not disagreeing with that, except that I would start with moving the M and L apart - this being a tight spot - certainly the first half is optically not as tight as the second half, so either the first half must tighten or the second half made more loose!
It will of course depend on what is around, but at a first glance it seems as if the thickness of the strokes did not warrant such an expanded kerning. Or in any case, following slugwash, the first half of the word needs tightening.
17 Nov 2011 — 8:07am
I'd start by moving the 'C' and 'O' a little nearer the M, as you've got round meeting flat on the left of the 'M' and flat meeting flat on it's right. This means the 'O' has to cosy up nearer than the 'L' in order to look right. Then, based on that, you'll be able to see whether your 'C' and 'O' need adjustment.
17 Nov 2011 — 8:26am
I'm not disagreeing with that, except that I would start with moving the M and L apart - this being a tight spot - certainly the first half is optically not as tight as the second half, so either the first half must tighten or the second half made more loose!
17 Nov 2011 — 8:31am
OK, now I see it. Thanks!
17 Nov 2011 — 10:16am
It will of course depend on what is around, but at a first glance it seems as if the thickness of the strokes did not warrant such an expanded kerning. Or in any case, following slugwash, the first half of the word needs tightening.