Soooo nice.

I seems to me that all your scores of experimental fonts have lead you to a very distinct and clean style. You have been hitting it out of the park (or equal rugby terminology) consistently of late. I hope you are pleased with yourself. I certainly am. :)

Not that this font is perfect as it is, but the rounded right legs of h, m and n makes me want to pull their leg...literally. I guess what I am wondering is what would happen if you dropped down the rounded bit a brick or two?

It's so good to see the progress we have all made. I love this place.

That was supposed to be 'Not that this font is not perfect as it is'. Yikes! Such a fatal mistake. Sorry.

Hi intaglio,
your output is astonishing.
this one is to me like a "script"-version of chicago ... and it's very well done.

the spacing problem:
it's a "lack" on funstruct.

you can handle the spacing by moving the start-point of a glyph on the left side ... but the spacing on the right side is always (and i mean: always) the same: it's one brick wide.

on a typewriter the space for one character is(/was) equal to all the other characters, what i mean is: you can place i.g. the 'i' on the middle of the space so the spacing on the right and the left is equal (and more than one brick wide)
In fontstruct there is just one case to manage it like this: keep the left and the right spacing one brick wide.
moving the glyphs to the left or right of the left-base-line in varying distances collides withe the monospaced setting on the right side.

some of the typograph-masters who casted their fonts in lead made characters in different widths with balanced spaces on the left and on the right of one glyph and they handled (sic!) the spacing by correcting the kerning by hand.
the Stamp Garamond dealt with the limitations of (book-)printing ...
but they couldn't do kerning pairs (like AV) in the way we can do it now with digital systems ... except they've made a "Glyph" that replaced the combination of A and V (sort of ligature)

but though the stamp garamond worked perfect in the setting of printing with lead-letters.

here's another story:
– Mr. Gutenberg made multiple versions of the same characters in varying width for printing his famous bible (I read about 200 different for the 26 characters of the alphabet) to achieve a perfect spacing experience ... he combined a condensed m with a normal and a wide m in the same text!!!


in fonstruct now we have a different spacing problem we've to cope with.
i think if you want to achieve a perfect spacing you've to design your fonts in a way that deals with the spacing-limitations of fontstruct.
you can draw perfect glyphs but that does not mean, that you've got a useful font in the spacing way. to me a font is like a context to keep the single forms of each glyph together in a balanced way (in all combinations!)

correct me if I wrote something wrong,
than i'll write another matter ;)

@guentersen: What is this "typewriter" device you speak of? (j/k)

@intaglio: I agree with thalamic on the refinement of your style. Getting better and better.

I've run into the same spacing issues, particularly on the double X scale. I thought it had to do with half bricks as well, but it hasn't seemed to make much of a difference. For me it has been fairly intermittent, but it is an often occurrence with smaller sized fontstructions. It seems to be on a case by case basis for certain glyph pairs. Sometimes spacing that looks good on the entire font preview isn't what comes out when you type. I wonder if Mr. Meek could expound on achieving better spacing.