The original DIN was designed to be just that. Digital interpretations are Isonorm by MecaNorma (also in the Adobe ollection) or Isonorm3098 by FontShop. There are more...
Many geometric typefaces that use round, not oblong, or oval, counters can be found in Part 1 of the Bauhaus-style Font ID Guide. Since those are sometimes scans from older books, not all of them are in digital form, but many of them are.
The problem is, even an apparently perfectly geometrical typeface like ITC Avant Garde Gothic will have subtle optical adjustments, as without them the characters would just look plain wrong. A circle looks like an ellipse when it's a perfect circle, a join will fill up optically if there are no subtle ink traps and so on...
Can there be no optical corrections at all, or is it OK if they're almost unnoticable?
18.Mar.2005 1.20am
The original DIN was designed to be just that. Digital interpretations are Isonorm by MecaNorma (also in the Adobe ollection) or Isonorm3098 by FontShop. There are more...
http://www.fontshop.com/?fuseaction=catalog.fontpackage&searchby=manufacturer&displayfontid=FF.6908.0.0
18.Mar.2005 7.13am
Many geometric typefaces that use round, not oblong, or oval, counters can be found in Part 1 of the Bauhaus-style Font ID Guide. Since those are sometimes scans from older books, not all of them are in digital form, but many of them are.
20.Mar.2005 12.18am
Variex, by Emigre.
20.Mar.2005 1.12am
Circle / Cirkulus (I've not taken a protractor to them)?
18.Mar.2005 1.44am
The problem is, even an apparently perfectly geometrical typeface
like ITC Avant Garde Gothic will have subtle optical adjustments,
as without them the characters would just look plain wrong. A circle
looks like an ellipse when it's a perfect circle, a join will fill up
optically if there are no subtle ink traps and so on...
Can there be no optical corrections at all, or is it OK if they're
almost unnoticable?