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.
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?
Oof. I quite like it. What's not working for you?
Better I think. Back to those numbers...
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?
I disagree about the 8. It is already looking like an S to me.
/8/ conversation fodder:
8: The "B" choice, flipped horizontally.
I suspect that would look really odd. I think A works well.
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
But I agree that the "A" choice works, and it might also be
worth closing either the top or bottom of the "B" choice.
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.
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".
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.
-sharper angles on top of /7/Z/
-tighter curl at top of /c/C/G/2/
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.
This will go into bestsellers no matter where you'll upload it. :)
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:
Love the droplets!
Agreed. This is looking great. These recent embellishments are miles ahead of your first attempts.
I just noticed something: the numerals are too light.
BTW, forget "droplets" - let's call these "squirts". :-)
Will you make accented swashes or ligatures or just basic latin?
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.
Stunning!! Will you create a bold as well or just leave it at this?
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.
Keep going with this?
Yes! Have you tried extrapolating to a light?
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.
Nice to see this evolving. What a step from your initial characters!
A peek at the bold under construction:
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/!
That's no Bold, that's a Demi!
With the Bold, go hog-wild.
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.
OK, OK, it's a Bold (but not more).
But with the Black do go feral porcine.
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.
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:
I think there's three things you can try: increase
contrast, increase contrast, and increase contrast.
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.
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? :-)
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?
Put that in a juicer! Yum.
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...
The main UC and LC. No ligatures or numerals just yet.
Blancmange Bold 04
[bringing those tittles down a bit to fit under the /T/]
/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?
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.