I really like this font. Has there been any more work done on it, or has it already been released? (…and if so, where? ;) ) David Thometz
I really like this font (too..) … somehow reminds me of the Font used in www.lancome.com… does anybody know what Font has been used in Lancome website?? Vinod Jain
It seems like pill gothic has achieved martyr status. I’m aﬀraid that the original won’t live up to the hype. I’ll see if I can dig up some old images.
Finish this thing already before it gets so old it becomes public domain! =)
Amen, brother Joseph. Amen! Christian, if you’d like to chat about distribution of Pill Gothic through Veer, please contact me. It’s a killer face.
Another pdf. I added small caps and a ton of punctuation to the lineal skeleton. Some of the punctuation is kind of rough, and I haven’t done any kerning. Next step will be polishing the italic, then adding weight. I threw in some OpenType features (small caps and a couple of ligatures). It’s not as tricky as I thought it would be. It really irks me that it only works in InDesign, and even their implementation is pretty weak.
I think the lc “k” is out of character. Otherwise great stuﬀ overall. hhp
Christian, I am assuming that are you building this face using strokes to begin with, right? The only reason I mention this is because when I zoomed in on the PDF I noticed that there are a few end caps overlapping other curves, particularly in the section character. By the way, did you get my email reply? Grant
Yeah, it’s still pretty rough. I’ve been going through and cleaning up all the bezier curves. Here is a pdf of a middle weight. The punctuation is still rough, but the characters are pretty clean at this point. I think the quotes are wrong, and the g isn’t working as well in a body of text. I think I need to lighten it up and possibly give it some more space.
Pill Gothic is coming together very well. I see it as a nice alternative to DIN and a good pick if someone likes Conduit but want’s something gentler. And Christian, the fact that you have Grant beating down your door is a very good sign. They only sell good stuﬀ.
>Beating down your door… As long as it doesn’t seem like we’re a bunch of stalkers.
I like the font.
Here is a pdf of nearly ﬁnalized spacing (the other one was InDesign optical) without kerning. I also included the bold (so far, it needs some tweeks—any suggestions are appreciated) and the accented characters. I also included some alternate characters. To Grant’s comments about the e, the original e had an angled cross-bar, but I couldn’t decide if I liked the horizontal cross bar better. I have since reinstated the angled e. As for the DIN stuﬀ, if Pill is really a useful alternative, I am ﬂattered. They do have a similar feel, but Pill is much ‘trickier’. Whether that’s a good thing or bad I guess depends on how you use it. I would like to add some more alternate characters to tone Pill down or dress it up.
Yeah, the caps are very DIN-ﬂavored. Perhaps there are some things you could do diﬀerently (drop the M to the baseline for example). I was originally drawn to that quirky k, a, and that g. The top of the f and r seem to droop a bit. Perhaps they’re too long / exaggerated.
Whatever you do, Christian, don’t ﬁnish this. Please, for the love of health and sanity! And whatever you do, don’t add bolder and lighter weights. And esecially, don’t ﬁne tune the punctuation or ﬁx the small caps. ;^) Seriously. I’m not a Din fan, but I’d be tempted to ﬁnd a reason to use this. If you build it, they will come.
Expanding on Joseph’s comments, it the quirkiness in those few characters which really sets Pill Gothic apart from being just another DIN (JAD?) I especially like how you’ve modiﬁed the cross-stroke of the e in the ae ligature to slope into meeting the one from the a. Perhaps the standard e should use the same type of diagonal. Without going overboard, there may be a few other select characters that could also utilize that diagonal stroke — the tail of the y and the tail of the Q, for example. I would agree the M would ﬁt in a bit better dropped to the baseline, and in terms colour across the uppercase, I would consider narrowing the width of the U — it looks particularly out of place the all-caps heading for your regular weight PDF. I really like how this family is progressing.
Pill Gothic caps versus (black) Deutsch Industrie Norm caps (red) I don’t want to saddle this too heavily with the DIN comparison, which is why I had to check it and post this GIF. If this is like DIN, it’s a healthy step removed from it, and I still think the lower case is very fresh.
Pill Gothic lowercase versus (black) Deutsch Industrie Norm lowercase (red)
Say, there’s a “stuf” in there! Thanks, pals. Add an umlaut and you’re there.
Joe, thanks for that comparison. I don’t know where all the DIN talk is coming from. Pill is further from it than many other designs. hhp
“Seriously. I’m not a Din fan, but I’d be tempted to ﬁnd a reason to use this.” Hmm, yep, I said this. Pill Gothic has more uniqueness which will set it apart from Din. I certainly wasn’t trying to insult the design with that comparison. I was, however, stating a fact that Pill Gothic will add new ﬂavor to this genre of type. You can’t deny that it is in the same vein. Can you? :^\
I don’t think you were insulting (and certainly not trying to be insulting), and I don’t know about veins and arteries, but Pill seems quite distant from DIN to me. hhp
Ahem, I was the ﬁrst to make a DIN reference, and I stand by it.
Ok Christian. It’s been 23 months since you originally posted this beauty. Is this getting close to release?
Well, there’s no mistaking the overall impression of DIN, especially apparent in the caps PDF Christian provided. That’s why I had to investigate further. But that said, there’s no reason anybody should be alarmed or put oﬀ by any visual relation to it. It’s like comparing Franklin Gothic to Akzidenz Grotesk, both are similar from a distance, but both work very diﬀerently when you start pushing them around and working with them. Whether or not a relation to DIN is a negative thing is a matter of tastes. I happen to love DIN and I’ll stand by that. =)
Caps are usually more convergent — they have a much narrower expressive range than lc. I think a good way to compare fonts is to look at the texture they make when setting a lot of text. In this regard AG/FG are far apart, as would be DIN/Pill. hhp
Here is a pdf.
Tricky Feathers?? Hehe! The angled ‘e’. What if you split the diﬀerence? The ‘g’. I prefer the closed version. Can this at least be an alternate? The bold ‘M’ — seems a bit heavy at the middle convergence point. I think the bold ‘4’ has a nice solution for this problem. The ‘&”, both weights — That point needs to be exaggerated or done away with. What if you ﬂattened it all the way up? Love the subtlety in the ‘ﬂ’ lig. nice! The non-curvy ‘y’ should be an alternate. The curvy ‘y’ is much more interesting. Will your italic be only an oblique, or will you do something more “tricky” like triplex?
Spacing: I think it’s slightly loose. M: wider? Hey, the smallcaps one is diﬀerent! And to me better. e: I like the angled bar one. g: I think the open one doesn’t work as it stands, but an open bottom might be a great opportunity to try to make the angled join less steep, matching the “a”/”e”. The diﬀerent angle in the “g” has always been the biggest thing that has bugged me about Pill. k: deﬁnitely the straight-legged one. s: needs work. y: the curved tail one. Pound: beak out of character. I’d put more staightness in the Pilcrow and Section. Your accents seem out of character — more rigid please! Same with the Cedilla. The “OE” is a “CE”. The Bold: I think it needs some modeling to avoid dark spots. But be very careful not to soften the character. Almost there! hhp
Tricks! More tricks! Just kidding. I don’t like tricks for tricks’ sake. I didn’t want a simple oblique, so I added some curves to make it feel more italic, for lack of a better word. Here [swf.7k] is what I had previously done on the italics. The y needs some work, of course, and some of the other forms will change, possibly with some alternates.
OOOOooooh… Christian, if you are going to be soft with the ‘y’, why not be soft with other characters? And the angled ‘e’ seems more appropriate here, so maybe you stick with a straight ‘e’ for the roman?? That cap ‘W’ is too wide.
That’s nice! Some great glyphs there. The only things: - The “Q” is too tricky. :-) - The “S”/”s” don’t look happy — maybe soften their spines. - I’m not sure about the descender of the “f” — in this face it seems contrived. - You’re gonna put dots on the “i” and “j”, right? Maybe circular ones. hhp
Pill is original without looking odd, which is an achievement, especially in a sans serif. Somehow the original higher middle on the M looks more consistent with your face, but is a bit awkward in your original. Johnston Underground, which looks wider (as Hrant suggests) and ends further oﬀ the baseline, has a nice balance. http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/p22/underground/ On the S and s, Palatino’s unusual S’s (also in the italic) might give you ideas on how to keep your ‘pill’ arch at the top and bottom, and make the connecting stroke stronger.
Nice developments. I agree with Hrant about the small cap M being better than the cap M… now I feel sheepish for suggesting you drop it to the baseline. Also, I agree with Hrant and Tiﬀ about the open g — I prefer the closed one. I’m not sure about the cross bar of the e, but I could be convinced. The italics are a very nice touch. Maybe an oblique set is an alternate, if you want to get soft with the italics? Just a thought.
I’ll second that question.
Wow — there’s still a lot of action in the development of Pill Gothic. Nice. Great work, Christian! Since I wrote you early in the year, I am looking monthly, if there is something new about that font :-) I hope, it will be ﬁnished soon. that would be the perfect type for all of my things. I MUST have it! ;-) Josch
Hi Christian. Just noticed the lower case s. The top curve is feeling a little pinched. Try lowering the spine just a tad so it’s only a hair above optical center. Cheers, Randy
christian: Im quite fond of this face. Please keep up the good work. I think you have found that many of us here appreciate this very much. Would love to see it released, like Grant oﬀered, maybe through veer? Hildebrant.
Dylan want. Dylan want. Please?
I have been tweeking on the spacing and have added some kerning pairs. It is very close to being ﬁnished. Any commentary on spacing would be appreciated. I have also added some old style ﬁgures for text settings.
Christian, Great work! Your font is beautiful and I will deﬁnitely be adding it to my collection when you are ﬁnished. Let us know when it goes live. As far as spacing, the overall color seems very consistent. Although it is diﬃcult to get a feel for the true spacing when the text is justiﬁed. I tripped over a few words in the second graph, but this could simply be because those lines were a little cramped. I would love to see the old style numerals as the default. They really play nicely with the other characters. Go Christian!!!!
Full justiﬁcation isn’t a great spacing test. Go ragged.
Yeah, yeah. Here’s the ragged text. : )
Stephen, good call. — It’s all “clicking” very nicely. The overall spacing looks great, except: 1) Important: your blank space is too narrow. 2) The “r” is loose on the right. The OS numerals bother me. At the very least I think they need to be bigger in the body, like the height of the smallcaps. Some other stuﬀ: 1) In both sets of numerals, the “2”, “4” and “7” are dark. 2) Why is the eszet short? 3) Some of the diagonals are a bit dark. Like look at the “Z”. 4) The bars of “f” and “t” need to be thicker. 5) I think the “S” needs a rigid spine. 6) Wassup with that megatrap in the Bold smallcap “A”? Almost there! hhp
Thanks Hrant, but two disagreements: - I don’t see how the ‘r’ has too much right space. If it was any tighter it would hit the ‘f’ in an ‘rf’ combo. - The ﬁgures are just ﬁne. Make a quarter-height or “hybrid” if you want to, but these ﬂow with mixed case well. What Bold Smallcap ‘A’ are you looking at?
reckon i been waitin’ myself.
Well, I don’t know what’s already been kerned in there, but you have to account for linguistics, like how often what ends up on the right side of the “r”; that determines your base spacing — and then comes kerning. Plus you have to decide how bad touching is — I think people who have kerning oﬀ don’t mind touching that much. Also, in a sans face with such a strong-beaked “r” you’re in a position of relying more on kerning to really make things click. — That “A” can be seen in the December 29 PDF, in the captions for the side stuﬀ on page 1. hhp
Yeah, the small-cap A was messed up. It has since been ﬁxed. Here is the same text set in bold.
Here’s a question. I have the font set up as a multiple master, where the regular weight (as seen in the above samples) is 400. The bold (as seen in the pdf in this post) is 1000. I plan on releasing a light (0), regular (400) and bold (1000). I don’t think that a meduim weight (650) would be gratuitous. Would any other in-between weights be useful, or would they just be more font list clutter? Opinions please:
Four weights is much better than three, if they’re paired right. James Montalbano once explained it (on Typophile) very sensically — assuming I remember it right: the Regular should be weighted for text, the Bold for emphasis in a body of Regular; the Light should be an alternate weight for text; and the Semi (or Demi) an emphasis weight for the Light. All this means that you don’t want them spaced mathematically, but instead according to function. Also, in practice the Semi can serve very well for text, except it doesn’t have a “bold” (in a set of 4). hhp
Overall very impressive. I think the lower case s could still use some work; to me it is a little falling backwards to the left. The upper case S also does this, but only very very slightly. The lining 2 also I think does not work so well — something about the curve of the spine; the hanging 2 works.
Here are the four weights, along with the complete character set.