CakePHPen-usSun, 12 Feb 2012 16:04:28 +0000Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:04:28 +0000http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rssFontStruct | FontStruction Feed: Origamihttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559FontStruct comment feed for the FontStruction: OrigamiComment from funk_kinghttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9227http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9227<br /><img src="/showings/show/1381" alt="" />Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from thalamichttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9230http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9230Exceedingly cool. :)Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from kixhttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9232http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9232wonderful idea and execution. i really dig your decision on "e". great work. how about doing one that is completely in the height of your alternative "s"?Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from aphoriahttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9247http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9247I'm so glad you did this. I loved the c in FS Collaboration. Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from intagliohttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9253http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9253PINK DOT!! PINK DOT!! PINK DOT!!Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from thalamichttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9255http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9255I think the vertical part of the glyph two before the ? (the +, maybe?) makes a nice s.Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from kixhttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9294http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9294yyeahh! it looks friggin good. probably good enough for sale, but i think, that "Z" needs rethinking though. this one looks a little, as if it's "bandaged", like a mummy :) Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from funk_kinghttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9301http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9301my Z quandary - which one to pick?<br /><img src="/showings/show/1391" alt="" />Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from Stewfhttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9303http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9303Congratulations! FontStruct Staff have deemed your FontStruction worthy of special mention. “origami” is now a Top Pick.Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from kixhttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9318http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9318i think it must be 1 or 5, bacause the height is the main argument... heheThu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from afrojethttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9328http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9328I agree with Kix about #1. Although it's hard to tell from the sample because your constant is changing. Give it to us again with a constant context. Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from JoeAllisonhttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9741http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9741Brilliant work! I think you should use Z-3 because it looks as tho it doesnt stagger as far below the baselineThu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from JoeAllisonhttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9742http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#9742In fact, im not sure. I think the Z just looks perculiar beside the Y!Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000Comment from funk_kinghttp://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#10345http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/194559#10345thanks joe. so i finished the caps a while back in a cloned version and have decided to release as a separate file. only started as the caps, but after previewing decided to modify and make small caps too. i think i finally settled a one or two z's :)Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000