Download disabled
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.
BENGALIQUE - Contemporary grotesk type
A condensed geometric Grotesque style, that at first glimpse looks somewhat simplistic. And for the larger part this is true. The goal was to do a ever so slightly spiced up take on this 19th Century classic style.
At it's core, the letterforms have this strong geometric grotesque backbone that is easy to recognize.
While trying to preserve that unpolished characteristic classic Grotesque basic form, I attempted implementing some personal twists, hoping to make a more contemporary but faithful variation to it's crude classic renegade traditions.
Some of the more distinguishing features for this font are it's heavily condensed style, the somewhat quirky curvatures, overshoot and/-or tapered ends in certain 'sweet spots' on a glyph's leg or terminal.
At random some legs will also ascend and descend just a tiny tad bit, gently adding this extra layer of dynamic depth and playfulness.
Spurs are slightly tapered, counters, negative spaces are in mostly rectangular and do not mirror their convex outer curves, in fact the only concave curvatures within a partially enclosed negative space are those that have strokes intersecting or when a curved shape is used to replace diagonals.
(such as; "B, Kk, Ss, Xx, Y, Zz" numerals; "2, 3, 5, 8")
Note that a couple more unmentioned characters make use of concave curves as well to accentuate specific choices.
(such as; "R, t, ß, etc.")
Visual corrections and optical compensating was exclusively performed on the top part of the glyphs, not their bottom.
-- Some additional side-bearing and kerning is still required --
No filters used...
The font works best for 'Display Type' at most point size. In smaller quantities it can be used for 'Body Type' as well with some proper adjustments to the horizontal spacing. But, nonetheless the font's condensed nature, it's tight letter spacing and some thinner strokes still heavilly affect the flexibility for legible Body-Type-use.
Recommended size for Digital-Display-use is 28pts or higher, and bellow 20pts the font becomes unreadable in Digital-Display-use. But I hope you like it so far, and feel free to let me know what u guys think! ?
That's all for now folks..
Cheers
18 Comments
Good work! I like the overall look, but I think it might be convenient to include the visual corrections and optical compensation also at the bottom of the glyphs for easier readability, IMHO.
Perhaps this would overcome a certain undulating visual aspect in that area of the font...
@elmo: Alright, thanks for your opinion pal. Next letter session illl test out how it works out.. perhaps ur right!
I wrote that just for a feeling. In the end, it's up to you to see if you like it when you try it.
@Sed4tives: You keep churning out fantastic works at a high rate. This one is no exception: beautiful letters supported by plenty of research, documentation, and samples. I found two issues with STF_BENGALIQUE: I think it's a bit crowded. I would test more generous spacing; let the letters breathe. The other issue: the different length of vertical strokes (of h, m, n, x, etc.) is very distracting at the baseline. Elmoyenique pointed out basically the same problem. You could either cut all vertical strokes at the baseline or make the overshoots more pronounced, thus helping the reader to distinguish similar letters. Personally, I like those letters (f, h, m, n, x) as they are. They remind me of blackletters. However, some ideas that look wonderful at the individual glyph level turn out to be not tremendously practical at the text level. Keep up the good work. 10/10
Once more thanks everyone for the comments, motivating as always!
@Frodo: First of all, I relaxed the spacing slightly. I think it better right now. I can imagine that for certain applications the vertical strokes can distract, especially in Body-Type at smaller point sizes. For this reason I wrote this in the description:
"The font works best for 'Display Type' at most point size. In smaller quantities it can be used for 'Body Type' as well with some proper adjustments to the horizontal spacing. But, nonetheless the font's condensed nature, it's tight letter spacing and some thinner strokes still heavilly affect the flexibility for legible Body-Type-use."
...
Due to the display nature I don't feel okay with completely remove the idea of descending vertical strokes, but in an attempt to somewhat improve the issue at least a little bit I incorporated optical corrections to the bottom part of the glyphs as well.
Cheers.
Thank you so much for the TP Rob.
Congrats on the TP!
Why dose capital Q look like that
@نايف : Well, why not? I just liked it that way..
@Sed4tives ok
Please sign in to comment.