composite test

by intaglio

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.

Info: Created on 30th September 2010 . Last edited on 5th October 2010.
License Creative Commons
  • -
  • -
Fave Tags:
  • -


I wanted to create a font that really goes overboard on the make composite function. And what a powerful feature it is.

I sent a bleating email to Rob because I thought I'd discovered a glitch while attempting to make a particular composite. Only later I came to the conclusion that I was attempting to make the same composite twice. There's no accounting for user stupidity.

I'm very nearly pleased with this one. It's a shame about the s: on this scale it's super-difficult to get all the children to behave. But the spacing is a whole lot better than some of my other "crossing boundaries" efforts.
Comment by intaglio 30th September 2010
A really nice micro-fontstructing experiment.

What about this "s"? It is bland, but it seems to behave quite well!
Comment by Em42 30th September 2010
Coolness... :) Phenomenal use of composites and at such a delightfully small scale. Considering the latter, it is quite an accomplishment how well the characters go together – even this tight harmony compelled you to make an uncharacteristically symmetrical x. I had to see it to believe that none of these geometries are achieved with advanced filter overlaps. Bravo!

While you made a good choice on the t for the sake of keeping it’s boldness, how about an alternate with just a little more notch, like this?
Comment by William Leverette (will.i.ૐ) 30th September 2010
@Em42: thanks for the encouragement. Economy, consistency, spacing, elegance: pick any two or three depending on the grid scheme. In this one the main trade-off is colour: the s looks too heavy and the z looks too light. I can maybe fix the z but not the s.

@will.i.ૐ: I'm scared of the filters! I've had a few timid goes at one or two schemes in the past, but looking at the brilliant inventiveness of allegorica I can see I'm going to have to get my head around it if I want to ever come up with something stellar and small at the same time.

(Now there's a funny contradiction: stellar and small.)
Comment by intaglio 30th September 2010
Wonderful. It brings to mind certain fonts 'miniscule' weights, such as this, which are equally as interesting at display sizes, as their intended function.
Comment by chr.s 1st October 2010
Great work intaglio. I think will.i.ૐ makes a good recommendation for the t too.
Comment by aphoria 1st October 2010
@chr.s: I wish! It's very kind of you but my font isn't even a quarter as good as that one.
Comment by intaglio 1st October 2010
Love this fat version ... please push the set further ...please

Comment by Michel Troy ~UrbanPixel~ (Upixel) 3rd October 2010
I'm rarely pleased with the caps but I'll give it a go.

will.i.ૐ: I'm in two minds about the t. I started with that shape then I decided I preferred a straight ascender, but I can be persuaded out of it again! It's certainly the logical choice.
Comment by intaglio 3rd October 2010
Grrr. I also wanted to have the top terminals going in the same direction as the spurs but that was a no-go too.
Comment by intaglio 4th October 2010
Your current solution for the S is way better than I expected after perusing the last comment. To be honest, I didn’t notice anything at all ‘wrong’ with it as I scanned the caps (before reading your post). It works!

That said, I may have a better solution (which I will proceed to harp on again :) Try rebuilding/expanding this with 2x2 filters enabled. I mention this elsewhere, but 2x2 filters work no place better than within a small-scale. You can align the spine and keep the big curves for your S.

Allegorica simply wouldn’t be possible without this advanced filtering. Thank you so much for appreciating my experimental work, there, and recognizing it on several occasions. You are an OG fontstructor; I think I know just how much you can appreciate its novelty.

Back to expanding this set up: It shouldn’t take long considering the compact scale you worked with. It is still tedious manual labor. You already know this, and the rough spots of working with filters. I would love to see an automated function someday for expanding a grid scheme by any combination of integer factors. Seems like a simple macro would do the trick. It’s been mentioned before...

About the t: I can’t make a firm decision... It still seems the sturdiness of the un-notched t fits best with the rest, while the notched version looks good on its own. Well, I guess that’s my answer!
Comment by William Leverette (will.i.ૐ) 4th October 2010
You're right about doing the caps in 2x2, of course. When I hit the Ss iceberg I did think I would have to go that route. And hopefully I can get my terminals aligned the way I want, too. So I'll just have to bite the bullet and do it. I'll semi-finish this one and then use it as my source file for the 2x2 version. My only reservation would be this: is the spacing still going to behave under the 2x2 scheme?

By the way, thanks for the copy-and-paste tip about preparing composites in 1x1 scale for use in a 2x2 'struction. It does my head in trying to do it in 2x2. What a lovely workaround.
Comment by intaglio 4th October 2010

Also of Interest

More from the Gallery

Transeptby intaglio
composite testby intaglio
adhocby intaglio
roughcutby intaglio
Queen Mabby bent hamm
Ringby Alejandro Cabrera Avila (superhuasteco)
Isometric Loveby funk_king
Detourby Wataru Aiso

From the Blog


New Bricks: Square Connectors


The Video Game Font Preservation Society


FontStruct goes open source!


New Bricks: Half Arcs