I've remade previous AT Sour Love by adding serifs, it fits better for this 45 degree rotated heart. But as previous one, the downloaded font still has rendering issues despite my attempts, most bricks located at lower serifs change into other brick for some unkown reason. Holes in hearts were removed cause they too have rendering issues when downloaded.
Please enjoy a private clone to see how I dealt with contrast, curves, bracketing, variable letter width and the difficult-to-achieve emboldening of the capitals’ vertical strokes within a minimal fontstruct matrix (and If you like what you see, please download for personal usage and vote kindly! :)
Intaglio’s amazing recent work makes similar strides (see the excellent rounds, for example), offering a solution before me to several of these long-standing impasses of the medium.
More characters to come... :)This is a clone
A new take on my font home/sweet/home, expanded with some fun holiday dingbats. Just in time to use in your Christmas Cards! Please respect the license - if you would like to use this font for commercial projects, please contact Alexander@Kominek.ca
The ultra-low resolution of this grid may be difficult to grasp without cloning. Fontstruct’s logo has a nominal x-height of 3 bricks, by comparison.
The level of detail, control, and finesse possible in a given fonstruction depended mostly on resolution prior to the recent advent of stackable composites. Did you want it better? Make it bigger!
Brute force, now meet Elegance.
Instead of building individual glyphs hundreds of bricks tall, stackable composites allow us to design rich modular schemata hundreds of bricks deep. Using curved bricks at their largest scale, linear and curvilinear elements dynamically harmonize and oppose. As well, screen fonts can be effectively hinted (aside from notable lack of kerning controls) without sacrificing the integrity of joins and intersections. And the trapping possibilities, Oh the sweet sweet trapping possibilities...
Please, vote kindly and stay tuned for more :)This is a clone
Another leap toward the elusive subtractive Boolean.
Each character consists of nine bricks arranged in a 3 x 3, filtered and scaled, composite-stack matrix. Insane levels of smooth detail result.
This filtered, subtractive stacking technique extends those first published here.
Enjoy a private clone to grok my unknown approach. The possibilities are endless...
An experimental 3-D/geometric font, inspired by Mynameiscapo's "Metal Hammer [beta]". My first attempt was "InTrude"; I tried to make it look like it's coming right out of the screen or off of the page, but it wasn't what I was looking for. After retooling it, here is the result: it works! See all fonts: "Backtrude", "OneQuarterTrude", "OneQuarterTrude Inverse", "MidTrude", "ThreeQuarterTrude", "ThreeQuarterTrude Inverse", "ExTrude", "InTrude", and "FrontTrude"
While suffering some serious fonter's block, here's another "wonky" experiment: this time, based on my "21st Century Dot Matrix" font. Random numbers were used to determine each dot's nudged position for the vertical (–½ / –¼ / 0 / +¼ / +½), and another set of random numbers for the horizontal. Each position had an equal 20% chance of placement.
On the previous "wonky" font ("Wonky Pins"), I adjusted some dots manually to be more visually pleasing, but I refrained from doing that here. Because so many dots were nudged to extreme positions (–½ & +½ vertically and horizontally) WITHOUT further adjustment, the printed text is still legible but definitely not as refined at "Wonky Pins"...
This typeface was also based on 2 sets of dots this time: one randomized set for an even number of dots across a row (6 or 8), and the other set for an odd number of dots (7). Sometimes, even dots and odd dots are used together on the same row in order to match the placement in the original design. These blocks are present in the "À" position. A slightly larger generic block in position "Á" is only present to prevent word processors from 'cutting off' dots nudged too far vertically up or down; initial test printings resulted in ½ dots being printed at those extremes.
Perhaps another "wonky" experiment will place the extreme ends at a lower chance of occurance (perhaps 10%) while the other three (–¼ / 0 / +¼) more at likely at 26.67% each. Or perhaps an even higher chance that the dot is not even nudged at all, with lower likelihoods as you move outwards to the extremes. This might alleviate the need for any manual adjustments, yet still get the point across that something... something has gone wonky with the printer...