Advertisements

fs Special

 This FontStruction was selected by FontStruct staff.This%20FontStruction%20was%20selected%20by%20FontStruct%20staff.

by thalamic


Details

Description:
-
Stats:
150 characters, 24 downloads
Created:
Fri, 25th March, 4:37 AM 2011
Last Edit:
Fri, 6th May, 1:15 PM 2011
Permalink:
http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/462689
Tags:
V10, Fs Special, Uppercase, Lowercase, Numerals, Bold
Rate it:
  • Currently 7.93556
7.9Balanced%20Rating%3A%20%3Cb%20class%3D%22weighted_value%22%3E7.9%3C%2Fb%3E%3Cbr%2F%3EAverage%20Rating%3A%20%3Cb%20class%3D%22rating_value%22%3E8.1%3C%2Fb%3E%3Cbr%2F%3EClick%20for%20more%20information%20about%20this%20rating. 22 votes
sign in to vote.
Shared:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.

Discussion

thalamic
thalamic Wed, 4th May, 2011

meek
meek Wed, 4th May, 2011

Congratulations! FontStruct Staff have deemed your FontStruction worthy of special mention. “fs Special” is now a Top Pick.

will.i.ૐ
will.i.ૐ Wed, 4th May, 2011

Oh momma, what a beauty! Particularly the outstanding ß, featured faintly in your sample. :)

All the truncated corners, trapping, and the little notches (a, g, w! I, J, T!!) delight me, especially how quite effective they are at pixel size. The pixel display is strong throughout.

Your fluid s, lovely as it is, looks to me slightly too bold and the z too wide. Decent tradeoffs for such fantastic forms, though it may be worthwhile investigating a narrower z.

2334/2334 and a very special top pick indeed! :)

intaglio
intaglio Wed, 4th May, 2011

Great font, Thal. Really, really beautiful.

aphoria
aphoria Wed, 4th May, 2011

Very good...I love the lowercase especially.

elmoyenique
elmoyenique Wed, 4th May, 2011

Wow. I think I'll dreaming with it for a month (at least).

kix
kix Wed, 4th May, 2011

absolutely agreed + best "a" i've seen in a while. great great job

will.i.ૐ
will.i.ૐ Wed, 4th May, 2011

Wow, that was fast! You nailed em, Ata. :) As far as I can tell, and aside from a kerning pair just barely needed here and there, pixel display is now absolutely flawless.

I am waiting for the day someone publishes a website entirely set in fontstructions...that day gets closer every time a gem like this is released.

xenophilius
xenophilius Thu, 5th May, 2011

Holy crike, this is good! I love it. I gave it a favorite. And I give it 10/10.

Frodo7
Frodo7 Thu, 5th May, 2011

Wow! This is a serious piece of composition. Beatiful rounded shapes with balance and harmony. I could only repeat will.i.ૐ, he said it all. Check the é for a missing brick. 10/10

thalamic
thalamic Fri, 6th May, 2011

Thank you all for the kind words of appreciation and encouragement. Sorry for the late reply. I was consumed by work related issues and could not emotionally detach from them to be in the right frame of mind for the response.

@meek: Thanks for the Top Pick.

@will.i.om: Appreciate the appreciation. Your kind scrutiny is always a notch above my own and your suggestions always help to make things better. Technically the initial z was the same width as the rest of the characters. I made the E F and L narrower to optically match the rest and I should have done the same for z from the start. I think the problem was I was more focused on maintaining the z diagonal roughly the same angle as the s which caused it to appear wider than the rest. The s is a different story. I must have made seven or eight different s versions before settling on the initial public version. There are two problems with the s that I can't overcome. 1. The x-height, which forces a particular placement of the bricks for it to be rotation-ally symmetric. That makes the s appear either half a brick too thick or half a brick too thin. The current s is the half-a-brick too thin version. 2. The inside curves are achieved using fs2.0 brick stacks. The way I could get them working with the already established curves in the fs was to move the whole glyph half a brick over. While that is fine for sharing purposes, the anal-retentive perfectionist in me finds that mentally annoying. I tried additional brick stacks to move it back half-the-brick, but custom brick refused to be split into two brick combo. I'm attaching an image to clarify what I mean. The s in black is where I want the s to sit and the bricks in red are the ones I can't seem to achieve. Maybe you or someone else can help solve that brick stack mystery. As for the kerning, well...

@intglio: Thanks.

@aphoria: Thanks.

@kix: Thanks. I like the a too. The w turned nice too. x is the weakest glyph, methinks.

@xenophilius: Thanks.

@Frodo: How you managed to spot the missing brick on the é is amazing. Also, thanks.

Thank you all for the kind words of appreciation and encouragement. Sorry for the late reply. I was consumed by work related issues and could not emotionally detach from them to be in the right frame of mind for the response. <br/> <br/>@meek: Thanks for the Top Pick. <br/> <br/>@will.i.om: Appreciate the appreciation. Your kind scrutiny is always a notch above my own and your suggestions always help to make things better. Technically the initial z was the same width as the rest of the characters. I made the E F and L narrower to optically match the rest and I should have done the same for z from the start. I think the problem was I was more focused on maintaining the z diagonal roughly the same angle as the s which caused it to appear wider than the rest. The s is a different story. I must have made seven or eight different s versions before settling on the initial public version. There are two problems with the s that I can't overcome. 1. The x-height, which forces a particular placement of the bricks for it to be rotation-ally symmetric. That makes the s appear either half a brick too thick or half a brick too thin. The current s is the half-a-brick too thin version. 2. The inside curves are achieved using fs2.0 brick stacks. The way I could get them working with the already established curves in the fs was to move the whole glyph half a brick over. While that is fine for sharing purposes, the anal-retentive perfectionist in me finds that mentally annoying. I tried additional brick stacks to move it back half-the-brick, but custom brick refused to be split into two brick combo. I'm attaching an image to clarify what I mean. The s in black is where I want the s to sit and the bricks in red are the ones I can't seem to achieve. Maybe you or someone else can help solve that brick stack mystery. As for the kerning, well... <br/> <br/>@intglio: Thanks. <br/> <br/>@aphoria: Thanks. <br/> <br/>@kix: Thanks. I like the a too. The w turned nice too. x is the weakest glyph, methinks. <br/> <br/>@xenophilius: Thanks. <br/> <br/>@Frodo: How you managed to spot the missing brick on the é is amazing. Also, thanks. <br/>
will.i.ૐ
will.i.ૐ Wed, 25th May, 2011

Hi Ata. I missed your detailed reply on fs Special until now, happening again upon this delicious fontstruction while browsing meek’s favorites.

Somehow the half-brick too thin spine on your currently shared s is a closer optical match than the half-brick too thick version. I am interested to know why this is. Thanks again for sharing it and re-inspiring my investigation of the matter.

I am impressed all over again by how fs 2.[1] allows for such relatively fine adjustments to ‘curves’ and counters formed by complex arrays of polygonal bricks. I also understand quite well how this works. So, my surprise must be relative to just how highly tedious, prior to [stackable] composites, grid-doubling an entire fontstruction used to be as the only way around such tight corners. [Stackable] composites are great as they allow local grid-doubling. So often, it is just one or two exotic characters that might particularly benefit from the increased resolution.

fs 2.[1] proves a versatile solution even in the half-brick shift conundrum posted above. Meaning, this shift is currently possible.

Now, for that x...

Hi Ata. I missed your detailed reply on fs Special until now, happening again upon this delicious fontstruction while browsing meek’s favorites. <br/> <br/>Somehow the half-brick too thin spine on your currently shared <b>s</b> is a closer optical match than the half-brick too thick version. I am interested to know why this is. Thanks again for sharing it and re-inspiring my investigation of the matter. <br/> <br/>I am impressed all over again by how fs 2.[1] allows for such relatively fine adjustments to ‘curves’ and counters formed by complex arrays of polygonal bricks. I also understand quite well how this works. So, my surprise must be relative to just how highly tedious, prior to [stackable] composites, grid-doubling an entire fontstruction used to be as the only way around such tight corners. [Stackable] composites are great as they allow <i>local</i> grid-doubling. So often, it is just one or two exotic characters that might particularly benefit from the increased resolution. <br/> <br/>fs 2.[1] proves a versatile solution even in the half-brick shift conundrum posted above. Meaning, this shift is currently possible. <br/> <br/>Now, for that x...