@poisonaivi - A worthy "upgrade" to monopix but seems to have lost some of the flair of its younger sibling -- at least for the moment. For example, the I and T are missing the slant from monopix, but your J and Z are captured perfectly. Hopefully this is an ongoing project as the glyphs become more refined. :^)
@Goatmeal - I know what you mean. The reason for the slant on the original monopix was actually a design limitation! I had already decided for the glyphs to be sized 7x11px, but since the glyph width is odd and the stroke width is even, I needed a workaround for the I and T, which both have centered vertical strokes. With the higher-resolution XL version, I didn't feel the need to keep the workaround, but now that you mention it, I might give it a try as a tribute to the first monopix. Thank you!
2 Comments
@poisonaivi - A worthy "upgrade" to monopix but seems to have lost some of the flair of its younger sibling -- at least for the moment. For example, the I and T are missing the slant from monopix, but your J and Z are captured perfectly. Hopefully this is an ongoing project as the glyphs become more refined. :^)
@Goatmeal - I know what you mean. The reason for the slant on the original monopix was actually a design limitation! I had already decided for the glyphs to be sized 7x11px, but since the glyph width is odd and the stroke width is even, I needed a workaround for the I and T, which both have centered vertical strokes. With the higher-resolution XL version, I didn't feel the need to keep the workaround, but now that you mention it, I might give it a try as a tribute to the first monopix. Thank you!
Please sign in to comment.