Archive through March 21, 2004

Primary tabs

83 posts / 0 new
Last post
Randy Jones's picture
Offline
Joined: 23 Nov 2002 - 11:00am
0

Don’t have access to a printer to give any real insight, but i did notice some path direction issues (overlaps) see the eth, yen, D-bar, not equal, and a couple other (in all weights). To that I only want to add: superior job on this font. Well done!

Randy

Tom Puckett's picture
Offline
Joined: 1 Aug 2003 - 11:00am
0

Christian: These weights look great. The only thing that stood out though was the numeral 4. It appears heavier than the other numbers on screen and on laser proofs. It is most noticeable with the fractions. I think because it’s closed, it tends to appear heavier than the surrounding numerals.

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

Christian, sorry to pester, but could you show some samples with the four weights intermixed? Like a block of each with each of the other three used for emphasis.

And a question: what made you include the L-bar and l-bar? I’ve been getting mixed signals about whether to include them in my own “base” encoding or not.

Oh, and I think your curly braces need more oomph (a highly technical term difficult to explain*).

* Credit goes to David Berlow for that one.

hhp

Grant Hutchinson's picture
Joined: 10 Jun 2002 - 11:00am
0

Christian: I just emailed you an annotated version of the four weight sample PDF. Hoepfully everything makes sense in my comments.

Christian's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Apr 2005 - 10:57am
0

I’m still chasing down all the gremlins hiding in the curves.
Who knew it would be such a pain in the neck? I’m getting
pretty close, though. Here is a sample with the weights
intermixed. For fun, I turned on the alternates in the Light/
Medium combination. Thanks for the comments.


application/pdfFour Weights PDF
testing_bold.pdf (42.5 k)

Mike Emory's picture
Offline
Joined: 4 Jul 2003 - 8:42pm
0

Anyone have a link to the critique of this? I don’t see it in the san serif section.

thanks

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

Both look solid to me.

hhp

Van Anderson's picture
Offline
Joined: 4 Jan 2004 - 7:33am
0

Hinting needs some work, though. light/regular lc l, h, p, u have inconsistent rendering in that test, though in 4 weights sample they don’t seem to. Did you lose your hints somewhere?

Alvaro Cuesta's picture
Offline
Joined: 15 Jul 2003 - 8:04am
0

Christian, can you implement the Spanish characters?

Stephen Coles's picture
Offline
Joined: 14 May 2001 - 11:00am
0

A bit of news: Pill Gothic is featured in the SOTA
publication, Interrobang 2 which should appear in
members’ mailboxes very soon.

Christian's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Apr 2005 - 10:57am
0

Alavaro, si, he implementado todas las letras necesarias para espa

Randy Jones's picture
Offline
Joined: 23 Nov 2002 - 11:00am
0

HI Christian,

Nicely done on the extra light. So tricky to balance the modulation!

Your obliques look pretty good to me. The following picture illustrates the major distortions that happen when mathematically skewing a font. All letters are thinned vertically as you mentioned (and fixed). The letters that get most distorted are the round ones. You may know all this, but I thought I’d post it anyways for typophile edification:



1. The verticals become more thin as noted above
2. The bottom right and upper left (if applicable) thin out
3. The upper right and bottom left (if applicable) thicken up
4. The upper right and bottom left contract (the curve gets tighter)
5. The bottom right and upper left expand (the curve opens up)

Also note generally that the distortion gets bigger and the glyph more narrow as the angle increases. In my (limited) experience the tricky and time consuming part is fixing 4 & 5 (usally 2 & 3 at the same time). I was given this tip by Ed Benguiat:
The obliqued curve should look pretty close to what it would be if you oblique it half as much. In other words, if you oblique it 20%, make the curves emulate the 10% version. I find pasting the 10% version into the mask layer a handy guide. You still have to fix the modulation problem, but it’s a good start.

Cheers,
Randy

Eduardo Omine's picture
Offline
Joined: 18 Jan 2003 - 6:08am
0

More about curve compensation on italics and obliques at Briem’s website.

I think your obliques are fine, Christian.

Randy Jones's picture
Offline
Joined: 23 Nov 2002 - 11:00am
0

Superior Eduardo.
Briem seems to slip my mind too often.
I forgot the rotation the additional degrees!

BTW I agree that pill obliques are working.

Randy

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

Obliques: I don’t see much distortion, but I do think they need to stand apart a little more from the roman. Your angle is already steep, and you’ve already made it narrower, so I’d try making the obliques slightly lighter than their roman counterparts, and maybe change some forms too (like make the “a” and maybe the “g” mono, but don’t make the “f” descending — too old-fashioned).

And a question:
Are fractions for old-style numerals supposed to be full-height, or really small?

hhp

Christian's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Apr 2005 - 10:57am
0

Randy, your illustrations are legendary—always helpful. I had seen the explanations on Briem’s website (one of the most helpful sites I’ve ever seen). For these obliques, I didn’t do any curve correction; the angle seemed slight enought to not make a huge difference. The squarish forms of the letters help also. I did thicken the vertical strokes, however.

As for the fractions, I haven’t done a different set for the OS numerals. Should there be a difference? I agree that the 4 1/2 combo looks a little odd.

David Thometz's picture
Offline
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 - 11:00am
0

Odd…. What happened to the font sample(s) and the critiques?

David

Christian's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Apr 2005 - 10:57am
0

It is now 6:01 a.m. and I have stayed up all night correcting the curves in my obliques.


application/pdfCurves
curves.pdf (70.8 k)

Randy Jones's picture
Offline
Joined: 23 Nov 2002 - 11:00am
0

I’m sorry.

Joe Pemberton's picture
Offline
Joined: 8 Apr 2002 - 3:36pm
0

(Silently chanting to self: Go Christian, Go Christian, Go Christian. It’s your birthday…)

Randy Jones's picture
Offline
Joined: 23 Nov 2002 - 11:00am
0

I should have added to the last post, your obliques have the special duck sauce now! (a compliment)
Well done.

And the number one way to tell you’re addicted to type:
(Silently chanting to self: Go Christian, Go Christian, Go Christian. It’s your birthday…)

Joe, enroll in a 12 step program immediately :-)
BTW, the number two way to tell you’re addicted to type:
Describing oblique curves as *special duck sauce*

R

Christian's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Apr 2005 - 10:57am
0

Here is a rough condensed version. I still need to clean up some weight issues (The N, for example), and a few unruly beziers (always the s). I have added some special duck sauce to the curves in the oblique, though. I haven’t corrected the distorted weights on the diagonal stems, however (see the K). The bold is clunky as yet; I need to cut the connectors sharper.

I apologize for the large PDF. It’s only one page, but, even subset, 10 ttfs can be heavy : /


application/pdfCondensed
pill-condensed.pdf (138.8 k)

Christian's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Apr 2005 - 10:57am
0

Don’t look at that last pdf. This one is much cleaner.

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

The letterspacing here is looking increasingly too tight with increase in weight. If you have a weight axis going with the stems just getting fatter equally in both [horizontal] directions, and no increase in character width, that explains it. I’m a big fan of uniwidth fonts, but beyond a certain weight the forms will start looking uncharacteristically too narrow (or too wide on the light end) when you try to maintain set-widths. (Was that too terse?)

hhp

Christian's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Apr 2005 - 10:57am
0

The characters on the top are justified (in other words, it’s not a uniwidth font). However, the spacing is slightly tighter (2-3%) for the bold.

Christian's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Apr 2005 - 10:57am
0

A new ‘s’ shape occurred to me today. I’m trying to decide if I should include it as an alternate, or make it the default. It is more extreme, so in some ways makes the font less versitile. On the other hand, it makes the font more interesting, and, I think, justifies the ‘a’ and the ‘g’. Of course, the old S’s would be included in the “Stylistic Alternates” OpenType feature. What do you all think? Does it make the font less useful; does it make it more interesting, or both?


application/pdfNew S
New_S.pdf (43.3 k)

Grant Hutchinson's picture
Joined: 10 Jun 2002 - 11:00am
0

It’s an odd balance to maintain — unique personality vs mainstream usability. Personally, I think the new S adds a bit too much unneeded quirkiness to the face. Maybe this is due in part to the fact I’ve just become used to the more traditional S in previous versions of the fonts. For some reason I don’t find the existing ‘a’, ‘e’ and ‘g’ characters to be as radical a departure from the rest of the character set. I certainly wouldn’t abandon the character, as it deserves to be an alternate.

Tom Puckett's picture
Offline
Joined: 1 Aug 2003 - 11:00am
0

I’m intrigued…what does Pill Gothic look like?!!

Stephen Coles's picture
Offline
Joined: 14 May 2001 - 11:00am
0

I disagree with Grant. I think that ‘S’ will make Pill sell.

It doesn’t have to change the way the font is marketed (as a full-
family text-capable sans), but with this ‘S’ it becomes more
original and will catch the eye of the all too common impulse buyer.

Stephen Coles's picture
Offline
Joined: 14 May 2001 - 11:00am
0

I also like how the straight stroke becomes less obvious and the
’s’ settles right in at text sizes.

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

I have to say I find the new S/s discordant. I wouldn’t even be sure about including it as an alternate.

hhp

Randy Jones's picture
Offline
Joined: 23 Nov 2002 - 11:00am
0

Follow this link to get the skinny on Pill and other missing threads:

http://www.typophile.com/forums/messages/30/18545.html?1066163062

Randy

Topic locked