The designer of this FontStruction has chosen not to make it available for download from this website by choosing an “All Rights Reserved" license.
Please respect their decision and desist from requesting license changes in the comments.
If you would like to use the FontStruction for a specific project, you may be able to contact the designer directly about obtaining a license.
13 Comments
I would like to say that this is 3D, but you can't create 3D in a font yet, because there is no perspective. So then I go back to my drafting classes and I think it's isometeric, but my professor would have issues with that statement, because it doesn't actually follow the rules. Instead, this is an illusion, meant to give you a 3D or isometeric view, but shortcuts have to be made in order to generate a consistency with the font.
The capitals have the shadow on the right & underneath, while in the lowercase letters the shadow noses down and to the left.
Updated it with some composite bricks to take out the obvious flaws (too many white spots where they should not be).
Sample: A, B, C, D, then R? Something's not right…
Put one eye on this, please.
Very nice Drop Shadowing…
LOL... Thanks guys! I probably shouldn't be trying to finish up the font real quick before I pass out from exhaustion, eh? Alright, the A, a, } & ) should be OK now, @elmoyenique, I think I corrected those issues and I added 3 characters, so now I can go and create a new preview image and change out the stray R typo for the proper E, @BWM. I should have that up soon.
You just get so close to finishing, then you pass-out anyway because there is always one more thing.
Whoops, There are still a few drop shadow/shading issues I see. Maybe I should fix them, first. Always something, always.
Great work! I wonder whether the O and the Q could be narrower.
Thanks, Rob (@Meek)...
If need be, I can change it, but here's my thinking on this...
The extra width helps differentiate the O from the number 0, and because there isn't alot of roundness (the O is usually rounder, and bigger). It also helps differentiate the O from the D when the font is smaller (because the 2 round corners of the D pretty much disappear unless the font is large enough).
I suppose it would be easy to make it 1/2 brick smaller, instead of a full brick? And of course, the Q was just following in line with the O.
I'm gonna think on it for now, I have been up too long (all night and morning), anyway. Anyone else can chime in with what they think, too.
OK...
I seem to have lost an update post on this page. Needless to say, I was not happy with the skinnier O & Q. When I narrowed them up, other characters looked disproportionately wide. To rectify that, I widened all the looping characters (and the K & H) 1/2 a brick, and narrowed the M. I sort of used the design of the W as a means to a skinnier M, but they are a little different.
I think that you can clearly read all the characters this way, even when they are seen at a reduced size. Because even though it is a 'display' font meant to be seen in BIG text, legibility is still important.
I hope that works better. To tell you the truth, I kind of like the way it was better. But I suppose this version is smarter, more professional.
Now I'm thinking that I need to switch out the M and W design forms. The minor difference between the two would be better on the other character, I think? Taking a break.
Please sign in to comment.