They reminds me of MICR/OCR.

It's not pretty yet, but personally I'd like to see this idea pursued.

hhp

I like the idea, but it needs some refinement to avoid the "rendering error" reaction. May need to work a little on the balance. For example, the 'u' and 'p' look good but the 'L' is lacking weight at the top to balance out the double serif at the bottom. Also more definition of some of the serif transitions. The 'c' right now looks like it just gets thicker and the 't' and 'r' blend a bit giving a muddled look.

Great idea though and you should run with it. If you stuck, print it out and stick it in your bag for a few weeks. Let your brain run in the background until an idea strikes.

Designing a face with rendering errors is equivalent to designing a distressed face. Mind you, most look like crap because they don't consider how the effect works in context (in a word, or in a sentence), but a selected few still hold up. If you want to walk down that road, you could look into the effects of digital distortion and maybe also printer errors.

A small step, but big improvement:

And take this as a prototype (no pun intended). I know there are a lot of details that are messy but I want to clarify the concept, before fixing them.

In it’s current state, it sports a backslanted look. But not on all characters. You should either optically correct it or embrace it.

Interesting, can't quite decide whether you're approaching some sort of cursiveness or detroit serifs. Might be worth playing up one or the other.

I made some changes:(look at "t" and "e")

Also added a one degree slant.

Not sure if I can picture it. We will talk again in 2012.

Hi Martin. I still havent really revised the details of letters s, e, a o etc, because I wanted first to establish the basic form of the serifs. Your feedback gives me a good starting point to do so.

+1 for what you said about the "o".

I will post some pictures of my progress tomorrow or the day after.

How do these look for you?

The first version, of my typeface, but optically correxted to avoid the unwanted error effect

Hrant's idea (the way I understood it):

This effect makes letters look like some kind of stuctures:

More like a humanist type:

More like kursive:

I would still like to see what hrant explained because it seems a very worthy exploration for this typeface.

However I think the second design (your misinterpretation of hrant's comment) is quite an improvement on the former design, though those curves might not be necessary if you follow hrant's idea.

I also like the last version with the curves. In that regard I disagree with hrant that this typeface needs hard straight lines but I think right now you really need to establish which direction you want to take this typeface in. Also, this might be a rubbish idea but perhaps it's nice to vary a bit in serif style between Regular and Italic (if you plan to make an italic); for example rely on those hard straight lines in Regular as hrant suggests, and introduce those curves from the last picture you posted in the Italic.

Yeah that's how I understood your suggestion. It looks good for this basic shape. I wonder how it will look in text.

In my opinion these would be superserifs if they would also be longer. Maybe you could call them vertical serifs or glitch serifs (in reference to the rendering problem effect but that might be too negative).

I like the basic shapes but your slant is too severe. The stem of the /i/ almost looks like a /z/. I think you also have too many diagonal angles. Straight slabs like in Hrant's picture will work better. In your picture there's too much contrast between the serifs and the main strokes. I think it's quite worthy of a concept to pursue when done "right".

> Now you know what to call it: Disco!
Hah that's quite ingenious!

Haha, I just realized how my question would look just after Martin's remark... Not intended.