Advertisement

Details

Description:
Whole lot of stackin' going on. Approx 8 stacks per glyph, I'm sick to death of it. I've done quite enough "grasping at straws" fonts for the time being so here's one where I've curbed my instinct to intagliate my favourite glyphs. I'm trying to incorporate all the things I fancy in this sort of font without violating where FontStruct is willing to go. This is where most of my fonts fall down (and probably this one, too). Eventually I'll pare away all my affectations and I'll end up with a font that looks like... Helvetica.
Stats:
194 characters, 17 downloads
Created:
Sun, 14th September, 2:17 PM 2008
Last Edit:
Mon, 22nd September, 7:44 AM 2008
Tags:
-
Rate it:
  • Currently 5.87865
5.9Balanced%20Rating%3A%20%3Cb%20class%3D%22weighted_value%22%3E5.9%3C%2Fb%3E%3Cbr%2F%3EAverage%20Rating%3A%20%3Cb%20class%3D%22rating_value%22%3E5.0%3C%2Fb%3E%3Cbr%2F%3EClick%20for%20more%20information%20about%20this%20rating. 3 votes
sign in to vote.
Shared:

Discussion

thalamic
thalamic Tue, 16th September, 2008

Those stacks are a blessing when you need them (hello, williaum), but 8 stacks per character...wow, that requires the patience of a saint. (See if you can find the song 'Patience of a Saint' by a band called 'Electronic'.)

This is probably your most conventional outings of late. Yet there are still plenty of Inti to see here. :) I don't know if you aware of them but I can even spot them now. Let's see: the tyrannosaur arm of the G (so cute! :), the bottom serif on the Y, and the double angle center of the 'm'.

Don't remove yourself from the font. Helvetica already exist. No need to recreate that. It's much more interesting and exciting to see what you can do rather than how close you can come to ubiquity. I have a feeling you are trying to forge the fontstruct steel into the typeface you have in your head, and I also suspect you are getting closer and closer to realizing your vision. You have originality--Go with it!


intaglio
intaglio Tue, 16th September, 2008

Yes... I was being ironic in my reference to Helvetica. I don't think I could ever come up with a font that was at once so classically beautiful and yet so uncompromisingly severe.

Thanks for the encouragement. It certainly helps me to persevere, to add more glyphs, to stack a few more bricks, to add characters that one will personally never use...

... all in the hope of seeing that little pink dot. Pathetic, really, isn't it.

Do you think it's just a touch too odd having serifs on just the occasional ascender? (The one on the cap Y is a coy counterbalance to the fact that the stem falls neccessarily offcentre!)

Perhaps my reluctance to forego serifs is because I lack confidence in the overall spirit of the font (MOST of my fonts!) and wonder if it can stand on its own feet, unadorned, as it were.

Thanks again, your last para expresses exactly what I'm trying to do.


thalamic
thalamic Tue, 16th September, 2008

A suggestion: Create a easy-to-do version of the font of your vision. Let it be pixelated. Use only one brick--the full square--and complete it as you want it to be. Then clone it and modify just one property in it, say removing of all serifs or reducing the ascender height by one brick or something else. Since it is just the square brick, it will be easy to modify. Once you have a good approximation of the font you want, clone it again and refine the diagonals and corners.

Alternatively, start creating multiple glyphs in different styles and weights and heights on the same character page so you can compare and see side-by-side which glyph shape you like better. This is what I did for the Write set. was where all the glyphs came into being. As you can see from that, it was easy to make modifications with comparison glyphs right next to each other.

Just a suggestion...if it helps.


intaglio
intaglio Tue, 16th September, 2008

I'm sure it will! I don't know why I haven't thought of doing this before. I have tried side-by-side comparisons of certain glyphs in my fonts from time to time, but I've been in such a lather to get each font out I haven't exhibited much measured consideration.

Now that the adrenalin rush of FontStruct enthusiasm has worn off (and worn me out with it!) I shall certainly do as you suggest. It may mean less fonts flying out the door, but hey, I think we can all agree Intaglio has worn out the FontStructor anyway. The one in his own head, he means.

Other people are proving that FontStruct itself is IndeStructable, a source of never-ending surprise.


thalamic
thalamic Tue, 16th September, 2008

Oops! Made a mistake in the tag there somewhere in the last comment. Write | Dump. (http://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/94522, in case I do an oops! again)


intaglio
intaglio Wed, 17th September, 2008

I'm going to have to bone up on non-English languages, which I am pig-ignorant about.

I've run up against a roadblock doing diacritics for the cap vowels. Do I lower the X-height or raise the overall body height or something in between?

International Rescue. I can see I'm going to have to clone a few examples of other people's work to see how you go about it.

Anything can happen in the next half-hour...

Yes, I see Sencilla is the motherlode of diacritics. Get squirrelling...

OOPS! no, it's download only which will make it hard figuring out where my placements should be without printouts at work and other nefarious folderol. Oh dear, never mind.


intaglio
intaglio Sun, 21st September, 2008

A sampler of progress on the regular and bold of Plain James. A closer view in the discussion section of Plain James bold.

A sampler of progress on the regular and bold of Plain James. A closer view in the discussion section of <b>Plain James bold</b>.