Piquant

Primary tabs

124 posts / 0 new
Last post
Craig Eliason's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 - 1:44pm
0

Developing a nice terminal for horizontals seems to be the missing piece of the puzzle here. Top of /3/ and /7/ seem out of character to me--they look like graffiti scrawling. And as you say the bottom terminal of /2/ isn't there yet (and that solution when it comes could help you with /Z/ and maybe /E/ and /L/ too). Maybe get your brush pen back out and experiment to find new shape ideas.

Riccardo Sartori's picture
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 - 4:20am
0

I don’t think the B is so bad. Maybe a bit rigid on the left, and you could revise the bottom stem/bowl join.
For 8, what about just a single gap on top?

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

Oof. I quite like it. What's not working for you?

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

Better I think. Back to those numbers...

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

It's a little rough but here's some initial scrawl-and-scans with the brush pen. Are any of these headed in the direction you're thinking?

Kevin Pease's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Oct 2003 - 5:03pm
0

I disagree about the 8. It is already looking like an S to me.

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

/8/ conversation fodder:

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

8: The "B" choice, flipped horizontally.

hhp

Craig Eliason's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 - 1:44pm
0

I suspect that would look really odd. I think A works well.

Riccardo Sartori's picture
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 - 4:20am
0

A.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

To virtually all type designers, certainly. But I think not only
would laymen not notice anything funny, they would actually
benefit from the divergence from the "S" (my only reason for
recommending flipping).

But I agree that the "A" choice works, and it might also be
worth closing either the top or bottom of the "B" choice.

hhp

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

Horizontal terminals below. It looks better to have different shaped terminals for the top and bottom of the /E/ instead of having one be the reverse of the other.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

The top of the "Z" bugs me a little, but maybe it fits in your scheme.
I like the "2", but it might be better to make the top counter appear
smaller than the bottom (probably by moving the spine up). The "L"
should be narrower than the "E".

hhp

Craig Eliason's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 - 1:44pm
0

Those bottoms are all improvements, especially the /E/.
Top of /2/, like I've noticed in /C/G/c/, has a kind of low droopiness to it that maybe some curve-massaging could lessen.

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

-sharper angles on top of /7/Z/
-tighter curl at top of /c/C/G/2/
-narrower /L/

Craig Eliason's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 - 1:44pm
0

All improvements!

Jasper Michael de Waard's picture
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 - 10:32am
0

I still dont really like that E and alikes, so now I'm thinking maybe you should add that same 'serif' as Z has to the E and alikes.

Eimantas Paškonis's picture
Joined: 26 Mar 2010 - 11:24am
0

This will go into bestsellers no matter where you'll upload it. :)

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

Pardon my disappearance. I've been in ligature-land, building the rest of this thing out. I'll still take a look at those serif issues but in the meantime have a look through the rest of these glyphs. I'm pretty excited about the stylistic sets. Here's some over-the-top, swashy examples:

Piquant/Blancmange 32

(thx Minerva)

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Love the droplets!

hhp

Craig Eliason's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 - 1:44pm
0

Agreed. This is looking great. These recent embellishments are miles ahead of your first attempts.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

I just noticed something: the numerals are too light.

BTW, forget "droplets" - let's call these "squirts". :-)

hhp

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

Hmm. Agreed.

Eimantas Paškonis's picture
Joined: 26 Mar 2010 - 11:24am
0

Will you make accented swashes or ligatures or just basic latin?

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

I can do that. Wasn't sure how much demand there would be for that. Some glyphs probably won't allow for certain accents etc.

Jasper Michael de Waard's picture
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 - 10:32am
0

Stunning!! Will you create a bold as well or just leave it at this?

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

Trying to get the color right on these numerals:

That /8/ still bothers me.

In my perfect world, there would be a light and bold face (maybe even an accompanying text face) but am not sure how long that would all take. I can try out some bold glyphs and see if it's worth pursuing.

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

Keep going with this?

Craig Eliason's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 - 1:44pm
0

Certainly!

Jasper Michael de Waard's picture
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 - 10:32am
0

Yes! Have you tried extrapolating to a light?

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

I'm doing all this by hand, so...not yet. If I had known I would have made light/bold masters and let software do the in-between. I'll play with it. See how it looks.

Juergen Weltin's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Jan 2006 - 6:31am
0

Nice to see this evolving. What a step from your initial characters!

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

A peek at the bold under construction:

Craig Eliason's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 - 1:44pm
0

Looking good. I'd say the same thing I said long ago about the regular: mind balancing the counter sizes, which are again getting too narrow in some cases.

There may be a better solution for the top terminal of /C/G/, which here even more than the regular looks too turned in on itself to my eyes. An additional issue with this shape in the bold is that the /c/ may look too much like an /e/.

Love that /X/x/!

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

That's no Bold, that's a Demi!
With the Bold, go hog-wild.

hhp

Jasper Michael de Waard's picture
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 - 10:32am
0

Nice! Hrant, this looks like an extrabold to me.

Middle part of /e/ is too thick.
tittles look odd. I think you could extend them more vertically as well.
I don't see any counter-size problems. Perhaps the counters of /uvwxy/ are a bit too large...
Diagonal in /k/ is too light.
bottom of /j/ looks weak.
/EFL/ are too wide.
Bowls of /P/ and /R/ are too small.
Bottom of /U/ needs more weight on the left.
part where the thins of /x/ meet the thick diagonal should have about the same thickness as the part where the middle part of /e/ enters the bowl, which should be thinner in both cases.
/r/ might turn out too wide when set in a word.

Cheers!
jasper

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

OK, OK, it's a Bold (but not more).
But with the Black do go feral porcine.

hhp

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

Ok that's the kick in the ass I need. I don't want to be wishy-washy with the bold. Or black. Or fat, husky, whatever.

Blancmange Obese. That's it.

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

So there's essentially two types of terminals I'm trying to reconcile here. A "thin" one, like at the top of the /a/ and a bulbous one, like on the top of the /c/. What to do when blowing it up real fat? Any thoughts on some of these options:

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

I think there's three things you can try: increase
contrast, increase contrast, and increase contrast.

hhp

Jasper Michael de Waard's picture
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 - 10:32am
0

For /a/ go with nr 2.
For /c/ go somewhere between 1 and 2.
Why did you make the joint at the bottom of /a/ thicker? I prefered the previous one.

Hrant. Explain.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

I'm just saying the way to make a Bold
alive is just as much through contrast
as it is through weight.

Or were you talking about "feral porcine"?
That was just a joke: hog-wild. Geddit? :-)

hhp

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

That's the Typophile humor we should all by paying money for.

If you extrapolate out the curves from the original weight, you get this:

Looks unorthodox but it seems true to the design. Thoughts?

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Put that in a juicer! Yum.

hhp

Jasper Michael de Waard's picture
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 - 10:32am
0

Cool! In all styles you made so far, the bottom right of /c/ needs to be moved to the left a bit. It's falling backwards...

Luma Vine's picture
Offline
Joined: 1 Jun 2010 - 1:16pm
0

YES!

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

The main UC and LC. No ligatures or numerals just yet.

Blancmange Bold 04

50pointtype's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 - 12:44pm
0

[bringing those tittles down a bit to fit under the /T/]

Craig Eliason's picture
Offline
Joined: 19 Mar 2004 - 1:44pm
0

/t/ looks short compared to the ascenders.
/T/ looks light.
Some of the tall vertical strokes might be a little stiff looking. Is there a way to soften up those straight (or nearly straight) contours?
/s/ looks a little out of character - maybe too wide, too symmetrical, too smooth?

Jasper Michael de Waard's picture
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 - 10:32am
0

I think the main problem here is the difference in thickness of the horizontal parts when letters like /c/ and /a/ or /e/ and /s/ are placed next to each other.