Piquant

50pointtype's picture

Ok, this is a brushy, cutesy, small-x-heighty, condensed display face but I want to keep it somewhat structured, lest it fall into a one-trick-pony category. Ligatures and alternates could be fun on this. My biggest concern has been getting the thicks and thins in the right places. (I've been looking at Franklin Gothic Condensed for guidance) I need some eyes on this...

Piquant 01

J Weltin's picture

I like it! I feel however that the downstrokes on K and R are too alien. It works in the lowercase k. Also, the angle of the K’s downstroke is far too steep.
I would also consider the stroke endings of the thin horizontals; they look too square to me. The same goes for the thin upstrokes of M, N or U.
Just my two cents.

1996type's picture

I like it! A perfect combo with 'Madcon's music, swinging from my speakers right now. The lowercase really have a great deal of potential.

The Uppercase need a lot work. Not sure where to start. Compare them to the lowercase carefully and perhaps start from scratch. They need more of the swing that the lowercase has plenty of.

On the lowercase: Remove all straight stroke endings and replace them by the soft stroke endings on n for example. This would affect ijvwxz. They don't fit in currently.

o is bit too narrow.

tittles on ij should be more brushy, or just round, instead of the computarized vertical squezed ones you made.

j would probably benefit from a little curve on the bottom.

The continuation of the swash on g and y (past the stem) looks a bit forced. I'd simply get rid of it.

ces are leaning backward ever so slightly

Calligraphy-wise, it makes more sense to make the stroke ending of the ascender on d the same as in b. same goes for p and q.

xz don't fit in. Not sure how to fix this.

Good luck!

Cheers,
Jasper

50pointtype's picture

Thanks for the critiques. Your tips got me thinking about the "swing" of it all and so I got out my brush pen and drew some letters again but with a bit more flourish. Not so rigid this time. Here's what I've got so far. Hopefully I'll get some more time to do more over the holidays. (Incorporating your notes of course)

1996type's picture

Beautiful. Keep it going!

50pointtype's picture

Ok, here's the latest. I have some caps drawn but I'm just focusing on the lowercase for now. Also, I'm having fun with some alternate glyphs and ligs. And the spacing/kerning hasn't been addressed yet, so hold your fire there.

Piquant 04


riccard0's picture

Very, very nice, but what’s “brography”? ;-)

eliason's picture

Think about preserving visual balance in the counters of different letters -- some get too small here.

50pointtype's picture

Ha. Yeah, well, maybe a b-i-o ligature is forcing it a bit.

So I'm guessing /a/k/ and some of the swash loops are the offending small-counters? (or that alternate /o/) I see what you mean.

eliason's picture

Yes, and /b/d/g/p/q/.

1996type's picture

I agree with eliason. The counters of /bdgpq, etc/ should be balanced with the counters of /mnhuo, etc/.

The last two swashes, on the /b/ and on the /o/, look a bit forced and hurried.

I for one would like to see alternates for /acf, and perhaps s/ with ball terminals like the /ac/ in your previous post.

/s/ is leaning backward verly slightly.

/crsvw/ create too much whitespace. Make them narrower, or, in the c for example, add a ball terminal.

/vwz/ need conceptual work. They just dont have the right attitude.

The 'swash' on the non-swash /k/ is too round on the top. It should be a bit pointy like b.

Overall great job. I like it.

50pointtype's picture

Quick update on some of your recommendations. I didn't intend to have ball terminals on this but I can see how they're useful in filling up unwanted counters. Not sure if the /a/ needs it or not.

eliason's picture

That's definitely more even, and better for it.
Are you happy with the bowl shape of /b/p/? There's something about it that is unhappy to my eye. Maybe the top is just too pointy, or too far right? Or maybe it's just me.

1996type's picture

That k is darn gorgious! c is also better now.

/a/ looks better without terminal I think.

Bein' a pain, I know, but the right side of /e/ also needs work. The part where the 'crossbar' enters the bowl needs to be thinner. The very top node needs be moved to the right a little and the node on the very right (top) needs to move up. Just like /k/, /e/ needs to have the 'italic' feeling more. Perhaps you could even try to use the bowl of /k/ as a mask for the bowl of /e/. I'm not sure wether you should go all the way with the /e/ though, but at least more towards the italicness of the bowl of k.

In the italic of my font, the /a/ (similar to your alternate /a/, which has the same bowl as d), appeared to be wider than /d/. It's an optical illusion I really don't understand, but you should make sure to check it in your font.

One more thing ;-) I think it makes more sense to make the bottom of /r/ like the left bottom of /n/, instead of the right bottom of /n/.

Cheers!

50pointtype's picture

It is a bit pointy. I'm for rounding it off slightly.

Good catch on the /e/ and /r/.


eliason's picture

Structurally I think that new /r/ makes more sense, but perhaps now the whole thing should be rotated counterclockwise a smidge.

50pointtype's picture

Thoughts on which of these v's work best?

1996type's picture

Third. But it's still not there. Lacks character amd is too dark.

1996type's picture

/e/ is falling backward.

50pointtype's picture

Eh?

Maybe that bar on the /e/ needs to be more horizontal or even curve upward.

eliason's picture

There could be a little more weight on the top of that right stroke, but I think that looks pretty nice!

I suspect changing the bar on /e/ will make it too tightly curled.

1996type's picture

Nice! I'm only wondering if you should perhaps lower the right stroke ending of /v/ and /w/ to the same level as the left.

The /e/ remains a difficult case...

50pointtype's picture

/e/ contestants:

1996type's picture

3. Move the bottom two nodes a little to the left though. It's leaning backward.

LexLuengas's picture

I liked the /e/ when it's bar wasn't that horizontal; it flowed better. The solution is near to what Jasper suggested. I would only move the upper from the two bottom nodes to the left and/or five points upwards. Consider both propositions, mine and Jasper's.

hrant's picture

Very tasty!

I think the abrupt stem connection at the top of the
bottom-left bulges (meant to convey the turning of
a brush I assume) is distracting. It's too subtle to
mean much to regular users, and they won't get the
tool allusion at all, so I think it's better to make that
connection smooth. Remember, you're not making
this for other type designers.

Also, I'd try to tighten it all up slightly. This is
clearly for display, and the bold forms would
be happier even closer.

BTW, I think you need to find another name... This is
very sugary, not at all spicy. :-) Something a bit old-
fashioned, maybe French... What about Blancmange?

hhp

50pointtype's picture

That's the kind of quality advice you'll only get on Typophile. :) Hopefully this /e/ is done or nearly there. (nodes shown here)

Wow. Blancmange. (I had to look that one up) Thanks for offering up the name. I'll take it under consideration. And yes, I think the stem connections work smoother.

1996type's picture

Yes, it doesn't fall back anymore. However, following script/broad-nip logic, the control point I selected in this picture should go up quite a lot. On the other hand, it seems that letters like e and o have a perfectly straight stress, whereas letters like n d v have an obvious diagonal stress. For some reason it doesn't really cause any conflicts between them, though. Bringing up the control point I selected should bring some diagonality to an otherwise vertically stressed letter, which is what my gut tells me it needs, but you might be right in keeping it vertically stressed throughout the e (the way it is now).

Just to be clear, vertically stressed is when the broad-nip pen is held horizontal. Diagonal stress is when the broad-nip pen is held diagonally.

50pointtype's picture

For the most part, I've been drawing everything with a brush pen held horizontally.

hrant's picture

> following script/broad-nip logic, the control point
> I selected in this picture should go up quite a lot.

This logic is quite arbitrary, with no relevance to the
functionality of the/a font. It will lead you astray as
often as it will seem to give good direction. Plus it's
a brush. But same difference.

> For some reason it doesn't really cause any conflicts between them

Bingo.

hhp

eliason's picture

No, it looked better before (at 7:01).

Dr jack's picture

Nice work.

1996type's picture

I agree with craig.

1996type's picture

Maybe it's a bit too thick on the right. Something's still off...

LexLuengas's picture

Why did you move the node? And you barely moved the control point Jasper indicated... This makes it look awkward, as the line to which both right nodes lay collinear is now too angled (relative to the horizontal). If you angle that (imaginary) line, then be consistent and also give an angle to the upper line which corresponds to the both upper nodes (and is, in this moment, perfectly vertical). Or, vice versa, get rid of the angularity of the "right line".

50pointtype's picture

Hopefully this is more like what you described. The right node is back to where it was, with the bottom handle moved up.

50pointtype's picture

Here's another go at the uppercase. I want them to work together, so that's why I'm not going full-on swashy script here. I can leave the stylistic alternates for that. (See if you can spot the letters that I'm not 100% on.)


Piquant 16
Piquant 17

eliason's picture

Looking good! I'm really impressed with this progress. Making an all cap setting work is an excellent decision.

/C/ and /G/ top serif droops down too low perhaps. /G/ isn't there yet.
The plain thin left stroke on /M/ and /N/ is too straight and plain. /M/ gets too dense/dark in its top half maybe.
The right stroke on /V/ and /W/ may be too stiff.
Could you do something more with one or both of the terminals of /Z/?
/A/ and /J/ are fun, though they do take the face in a bit of a different direction IMO.
The nubby loop at the corner of /B/D/E/L/: that's such a tight loop, I wonder if it works as a loop. Perhaps simply crossing strokes rather than forcing the loop would be more persuasive. Or maybe a bend and change of direction like at the top of /R/ for example would be.

LexLuengas's picture

The /e/ improved, but I still see some imbalances in there, e.g. the bottom left needs a bit more weight. To fix this, move the left most node down to where the loop joins the body without changing the position of its control points.

/s/ looks stiff compared with the rest of your lowercase. As an individual letter it's nicely drawn, though. Or perhaps it is a matter of personal taste; I need to hear other's opinion.

/G/ doesn't look bad alongside capitals, but next to the lowercase it's distracting. I also agree with Craig about the loop corners of /B/D/E/L/. /A/ is too loud :)

Aren't the tittles too high?

Nice alternates!

1996type's picture

This might sound odd, but I think your caps would look better, both in allcaps and normal settings, when they'd be wider, much wider. Caps have a different structure by nature so they probably won't stand out as much as you'd think when they're wider than the lowercase.

Right now, they look ok, but no where near the swing of the lowercase. Swing. remember that!

Cheers! jasper

50pointtype's picture

Update below. /e/ looks better, and I made the top half of /s/ more narrow to give a less symmetrical feel. Various edits to the rest:

Piquant 20


eliason's picture

You might consider putting the gap in the /Q/ at the bottom rather than at the top (so that the stroke starts at the bottom left, goes up and around and continues into the tail).

50pointtype's picture

I had done that but wasn't sure how it looked. Here it is:

eliason's picture

That makes more sense to me.

hrant's picture

It also makes it less of an "O".

BTW, if you decide to go with "Blancmange" you'll need to kick
the "B" up a notch! (Sorry for the gastronomic double-entendre...
and that linguistic one too. :-)

hhp

hrant's picture

It's nice to see a "rationalist", non-conventional weight distribution.

The one is a bit heavy, and needs modulation towards the top.
The three is very nice, but the top is a bit light.
I'd lower the bar of the four to make it look bigger.
It might be nice for the zero to be slightly egg-shaped.

hhp

eliason's picture

To fit with the typeface, the figures could have more swing. Methods to consider:
- round-topped /3/
- gaps in /6/9/ (maybe /8/) like in your /O/o/.
- make top half of /5/ less rigid/perpendicular.
- exaggerate the whip of the curve of /7/'s diagonal more.

1996type's picture

I think oldstyle figures are naturally more swinging. Therefore it might help to start with oldstyle figures, and make the lining figures based on that. Just a suggeston, feel free to ignore.

I agree with craig completely. Furthermore, /1/ is too dark on top. Making it more horizontal will lighten things up a bit.

Crossbar of /4/ could extend a bit further.

What craig said about /6 9/ may also be the case for 0, although you have to make sure it differs enough from the /O/ The bottom of /2/ doesn't work. Maybe get rid of the counter curve (going more vertical) or exagerate it.

Try to flip the crossbar of /5/ vertically, so that it moves in the same direction as the crossbar of /2/, which is upward.

Cheers! jasper

50pointtype's picture

Here you go. The gaps feel right. I tried a round-top /3/ but I'd like to make this one work first. We'll see. The /2/ is still tricky. Cutting and pasting and flipping the little serif from the /3/ or /7/ doesn't really work so hopefully this way fits better. I don't think it's there yet.

And here's your alternate /B/ :)

1996type's picture

I don't like that B to be honest. The gaps in 6 8 9 could be larger.

Syndicate content Syndicate content