Skeletal script face

Hi All,

I frequented the Typophile equivalent of this board a good few years back and always found it helpful. I’ve drawn my fair share of amateur letters since (primarily for logomarks or identity projects) and thought I might try posting some work again, absorb feedback and hopefully improve! I’d love to (at some point) be in the position to release my own faces but there doesn't seem to be a clear roadmap showing what to learn and at what point in the process. At the moment I’m making typefaces for my own use on client work as part of my design practice.

Anyway, it’s been a horrible rainy weekend here in Dublin so for some escapism I delved into designing a script hairline for fun and hopefully to learn more about Glyphs too. It’s a display face but am thinking of doing a variety of weights or perhaps one thin and one thick. I know there are plenty of similar faces out there like Klimax, Marian and Line so I’m curious if others feel this is too close to those or whether it can be pushed to have a life of its own.

Any and all feedback, thoughts or advice appreciated.  

Thanks
Seán


Comments

  • Laura WorthingtonLaura Worthington Posts: 24
    edited November 2015
    I think this is pretty interesting, it has an italic feel to it in the lowercase. I'd encourage you to continue working on it! :) A few comments here for you that I hope you find helpful…

    On the /e/ which seems a bit out of place with the lowercase letters, perhaps considered a rounded form instead.

    The /w/, /c/ and /m/ are narrow compared to the rest of the lowercase alpha, especially the /w/.

    The descender on the /g/ is a bit wide, it may cause collisions when next to other descending forms.

    I'm not crazy about your /f/ it's very unique, but a bit too much detail and it's more difficult to discern what letterform it is, could cause confusion. Could be interesting as an alternate form, however.

    I think the bowl of the /k/ could be larger and the leg shorter, the counter is looking too confined.

    The /v/ is perhaps too different in style from the /w/ and the /y/ as they're all in the same family group, I'd prefer them to be consistent.

    On the uppercase forms, they feel as if they need more detail to their forms to blend in with the roundness of the lowercase. Take a look at Chancery styles for some cues and more decorative Italics. Overall, they need to be wider - the bowls of the /B/ and the /R/ could be wider and hit lower down on the vertical stem. The /W/ could be quite a bit wider as well.
  • beautiful letter shapes and rythym
  • This is cool. I actually like the unusual /f — it's distinctive!

    One small thing that bugs me is that the final strokes on /g and /j look like they're trying to be connecting strokes, but don't really connect to anything. They look cool when they're the final letter of a word, but otherwise they feel awkward (especially when doubled!). Did you try a version of those letters without those final strokes?

  • Dyana WeissmanDyana Weissman Posts: 125
    edited November 2015
    I think this looks great. I agree with @Laura Worthington, the connecting element on the /f and /t are distracting. I second the idea for alternate forms for now. Right now it gives me the impression that the rest of the letters should connect... which is a whole other typeface, really, and a long path to go down. 

    I'm also distracted by the /X, perhaps a straight / stroke, with more of a curve in the \ stroke? Or maybe that it's just too wide. And the /z also pops out way too much at me in text. While the overall look does have a bit of a cursive feel to it, this character just seems too far cursive for me, versus the rest of the letters. Perhaps if there were more very cursivey letters to balance it out, it would work, but I'd be interested in seeing something a little more italic. 
  • Thanks all for the input, very much appreciated. Pdf with updates below.

    @Laura Worthington I tried what you suggested with a rounded e which I think might have a friendlier feel to it, let me know what you think. @Austin Stahl I might keep a stylistic set with all those angular connections like /f /t /g /j, I would like to incorporate them and make the descenders connect as per @Dyana Weissman’s suggestion which feels like a more cohesive way to handle all those characteristics. I toned down that /z somewhat but maybe it’s still too much and just needs to be straight like the /Z ?

    The uppercase I barely touched for the minute apart from the specific characters highlighted; still have to look at Chancery styles as suggested, so will let that stew for a bit and see what decorative aspect I could bring to it.


  • I like the /z much better, but as an exercise you might try coming up with 5 different versions of it and see if you don't stumble upon something you like even more. Also, to clarify, I would caution you away from making the letters connect, beyond a few choice ligatures such as the /ct. In the future you can always revisit/expand, but I think this shows a lot of promise unconnected as it is. 
  • Craig EliasonCraig Eliason Posts: 596
    edited December 2015
    That /e/ is much more tightly wound than I was expecting, but it works well with the other letters.
    There is so much "crossing over" the stems in the lowercase (e.g. /b/g/p/) that I'm a little surprised the /B/ and /R/ are "detached." 
    How to handle tittles in an ultralight monoline design is always tricky. I think yours might be just an eensy bit too heavy. Did you try vertical-line versions?
    You're getting dark spots where two strokes gradually tangent into each other (e.g. /b/d/m/p/r/) but that's something you can try to clean up at the end. 

Sign In or Register to comment.