Cf. "VES 4x5 P" & "VES 5x5 P".

@Piotr Grochowski:

• Wasting my time by replying to a definitive multi-banned SPAMMER* like you prevents me from encouraging the FS community with my 40-decade experience in pixel art/fonts. (FontStruct.com is otherwise still full of promising pixel __artsts__ – unlike what you showed us during years, by frantically cloning the others.)

* As a (boasting) kid, you may still not (want to) understand my comment above (that you pasted from your free web page – another forbidden spam, thus your numerous infamous FS nicknames). Well, anyway, I'm going to try again with you, unruly and disrespectful baby (although I'd prefer that your parents remind you to work a lot more at school than on your large simili-pixel fonts).

1. Your font rules: « two bitmap font designs (6×12 and 8×16) », sounds fine to me, even it would still look rather interesting for my concerns if I were not limiting 'my' main project to about 4×5 pixels. Nonetheless, I have to repeat myself: « is not very low-res, [and is] super easy to do ». Therefore, there is absolutely nothing wrong here from this mathematical statement (which arises from the maximum number of unique glyphs contained in the overall matrix, in this case your 2^8×16 = 340 282 366 920 938 463 463 374 607 431 768 211 456 **possible** glyphs, versus 2 823 'only' in your revision 3.0). Last but not least precision, I never asserted that your “Custom Font ttf” « should not exist »; however, you should realize, pertaining to its necessary categorization (based on objective criteria), that you can NOT include this work to VERY low resolution softwares/drawings. Its grid size is almost in-between – the modern/HD displays might show it smaller than it is actually, perhaps your users (shall?) get fooled by this difference of scale.

2. I am glad to read that the visible spacing glitches should mostly come from a defect in the rendering engine/implementation (I cannot remember precisely which they were, on the FS previewer or/and on my word processors, and I never mixed them with glyph substitutions hopefully)… Then, I tried again your CustomFontttf8.16v3.0.ttf (just 1 out of 8 fonts in customfontttf-20104.zip): in Microsoft Word at least, the monospacing looks almost rock-steady (better than the rendition of your web page by my desktop browser). Compared to e.g. the old Consolas, Lucida Console, Courier New, even Unifont, which all break the fixed width al lot, and at different sizes; I confirm what you showed off in your Comparisons page online. That's why I kept your 8×16 installed… (for Us-Ascii and Unicode art too.)

3. Your current download link/page is safe (unlike the third-party/warez M*** one that you spammed us about on April 2018). I'm unsure about what you meant (in your Polenglish – my Frenglish doesn't help much); I hope it's over now.

4. So, what is currently your full license agreement and file? Since without this prerequisite, I'm afraid the developers won't include or reuse your fonts as much as what you'd expected, for free or not. Corollary: when will you come of age (18-yo)? Should we still get in touch with your mum and dad to discuss the glyphs thay you may have freely 'reinvented' to say the least? Why don't you sell your (WIP) fonts (with the authorization of your legal guardians)? In this field of softwares, the copyrights imply that your design is original enough to be protected under your name (directly or not)… Per-glyph speaking, in my opinion most of your work (every font you presented) cannot meet these terms, in effect, in case you would need to start a dispute in the future… A great deal of download websites may 'share' your time-consuming creations with this lack of uniqueness in mind (from the limited low-res pixel world).

You deleted your own fontstructions (because they were not rendered optimally in the fontstructor, you explained to me)…
We'd then expect that you leave FontStruct.com once for good (so that you can bother your young friends elsewhere, boy)…

End of Piotr 'spammer' Grochowski's thread.