Musk, High Contrast Sans Serif

Eko BimantaraEko Bimantara Posts: 9
edited November 22 in Type Design Critiques
Hi, I'm new in type, previously I'm working for Illustration and logos, and this is my second font family that still in progress. Im looking at Linotype's Optima and try to explore that style. Focus in readability on text, this sample is not yet kern. I need to read a lot about types and its term to describe more about this work, so far I think this is a sans serif with high contrast stems that make it look Classic :)

Best regards


Comments

  • Adam JagoszAdam Jagosz Posts: 88
    edited November 22
    Hi @Eko :)
    Welcome to the forum.
    You might want to attach a pdf sample of your work so people can zoom in and out to see the details.

    If I recall correctly, this is a real names forum unless your nickname identifies unambiguously who you are (as in: foundry name).

    As to the design itself, I like the general idea of /g. The terminals on the /S bring to mind Armenian type, or maybe its rendition in Noto. The corresponding terminal on /G needs refinement. The top bar on /E should be shorter than the bottom bar, in most cases.

    I'll leave the real critic to the pros ;D
  • James PuckettJames Puckett Posts: 1,470
    That bold seems fairly light by today’s standards. 
  • The stroke weight seems to vary by three groups, from too heavy to too light: Diagonals, verticals, round glyphs. So V looks too dark compared to H, but O looks to light compared to H. This is equally visible in the lowercase, and in the text at small size you can notice it as the stems being clearly darker.

    The diagonals, especially at the end of the alphabet, feel stylistically out of place and generally too straight. If you compare K to V, for example, the V stands out as too rigid. Maybe you can try some stroke variation in the verticals and diagonals, so they mingle better with those luscious terminals you got going. At the same time, try to not overdo it with that vibe, if you mean to keep it readable for text, which right now still nicely works for small passages.

    Also, the M, since it is the namesake letter of the face; it has a very open crotch.

    More consistency is needed, but the direction is nice; a typeface with very pleasant tones and its own character.
  • @Adam Jagosz Thanks!

    I'll attach pdf's in next post, Eko Bimantara is the real name ;)

    The /S and /s terminals is on horizontal position, like a regular serif style, not only I wanted it to look unique, also because the diagonal terminals (as /C, or /G) is not fit at all.

    terminal on /G needs refinement
    Yes I think so, I think I will open the counter a little bit wide.

    The top bar on /E should be shorter than the bottom bar
    Yes, thanks for this ;)
  • @James Puckett

    I'm looking at Lato for this weight, which have a slight difference between the weight. The heaviest black is not too thick. Reading them is so easy although when it have difference weight at a body text.

    But I think I'm considering to make more distance between the weight.

    Thanks
  • Eko BimantaraEko Bimantara Posts: 9
    edited November 22
    @Johannes Neumeier

    The stroke weight seems to vary by three groups, from too heavy to too light: Diagonals, verticals, round glyphs. So V looks too dark compared to H, but O looks to light compared to H. This is equally visible in the lowercase, and in the text at small size you can notice it as the stems being clearly darker.
    Yes, I had measured them again and found that some of those stems have the same size, like the left side of /V is the same as horizontal /H and I forgot the optical trick for curve and straight stem, they were at the same size. I'll change these.

    The diagonals, especially at the end of the alphabet, feel stylistically out of place and generally too straight. If you compare K to V, for example, the V stands out as too rigid. Maybe you can try some stroke variation in the verticals and diagonals, so they mingle better with those luscious terminals you got going. At the same time, try to not overdo it with that vibe, if you mean to keep it readable for text, which right now still nicely works for small passages.
    "Luscious terminals" I like this expression :)

    Yes the thicker terminals was for reading purpose, I just try to avoid sharp edges but dont want to make a ball or half circle either, so thats make these vibes. I've done some overdo with it and change for some variative edges; Mix them with a cut straight as /U and slanted soft cut ascender as /t /b /d. But yes, i think the straight cut edges is out of style. I will make some change for the straight cut strokes.

    Also, the M, since it is the namesake letter of the face; it has a very open crotch.

    Yes, its because I'm try to make less slanted side. I'll change that

    Thank you very much for this details

    This is why I love making a font, forcing me to have a sharp vision :)
  • Hrant H. PapazianHrant H. Papazian Posts: 920
    edited November 23
    I'm like a broken record on this, but: if you're focusing on readability it's important to use the vertical space more effectively; because Latinate languages exhibit many more ascenders than descenders, making those two equal isn't as rational as it might seem; the former have to be longer, and since in this case the caps are at the same height as the ascenders –while they should generally be shorter– I would simple raise the ascenders.
    The terminals on the /S bring to mind Armenian type
    Interesting observation. The Armenian «Տ» is basically like an "S" with a more closed-in form (if also narrower in some designs).

    BTW personally I prefer a light Bold in a text[y] face, because it keeps it usable for text, strangely enough. :-)  Overly dark Bolds were concocted during the Core Fonts era, to reduce hinting work...
  • @Hrant H. Papazian 

    if you're focusing on readability it's important to use the vertical space more effectively; because Latinate languages have many more ascenders than descenders, making those two equal isn't as rational as it might seem; the former have to be longer, and since in this case the caps are at the same height as the ascenders (while they should generally be shorter) I would simple raise the ascenders.

    I made the x-height short, its 441 with standard 1000 upm. With slanted cut on ascenders stroke I think its easy to adjust the ascender or descender without changing the whole proportion if it needed. I'll considering that. Thanks
  • Eko BimantaraEko Bimantara Posts: 9
    edited November 23
    I don't know what is light bold or dark bolds mean, need more reference about those term :)
  • edited November 23
    I don't know what is light bold or dark bolds mean, need more reference about those term :)
    This refers to the fact that not every style called ‘Bold’ looks equally heavy, compared to the style called ‘Regular’ or ‘Book’ in the same typeface. Here is an example:


    In the top sample, the increase in stroke thickness from the first line to the second is more pronounced than in the bottom sample. Of course, there are also differences in heaviness between the regular styles of the two typefaces as well as in overall size. But even when we take these into account, the bold styles are not equally heavy, compared to their regular counterparts. In the top sample, the stem of ‘h’ is ±80% thicker in the bold than in the regular style. In the bottom sample, the difference is only ±60%. This value will not be exactly the same for every letter, but it gives a quantitative indication of a visible difference. One could say that the bold style of the top typeface is heavier than the bold style of the bottom typeface, but this can also be expressed in terms of light/dark. The top typeface has a darker (i.e., heavier/bolder/thicker) bold style than the bottom typeface, which has a rather light (i.e., less heavy/bold/thick) bold style.

    Of course, this is not just a matter of style and taste. It has functional implications as well. When you only have one bold style in a typeface, the way you design it will determine the way it is best used. When you make it fairly dark/heavy/bold/thick, it will stand out strongly against the regular style. This can be useful in some contexts (e.g., in display typography), but may be less than ideal for users who need a more subdued way of accentuation (e.g., in some types of text typography). These considerations may all be moot with variable fonts, but we’re not quite there yet.
  • Eko BimantaraEko Bimantara Posts: 9
    edited November 23
    This refers to the fact that not every style called ‘Bold’ looks equally heavy, compared to the style called ‘Regular’ or ‘Book’ in the same typeface. Here is an example:


    The top typeface has a darker (i.e., heavier/bolder/thicker) bold style than the bottom typeface, which has a rather light (i.e., less heavy/bold/thick) bold style.

    I see, thats what i mean with Lato, the thickness between regular and bold style is lighter compared to Myriad or Camphor, I like that, thanks for the explanation :smile:
  • Christopher Bergmann said:
    When you only have one bold style in a typeface, the way you design it will determine the way it is best used.
    Even if you have multiple darker weights, the Bold needs to be determined very judiciously, since it will generally be the go-to style for darkness.
  • The relative weight of bolds and lights is also influenced by the use case. For example a bold geared towards screens use might be more explicitly dark to convey a proper weight increase on any number of resolutions and rendering algorithms, whereas a high quality editorial print might be a little more subtle and its weight increase can still be obvious enough.
    The other thing that also makes weight relative is the intended use size, and how cluttering up adds extra weight in small sizes, which you might compensate for to keep the weight distribution as intended.

    But with both those issues it is a chicken and egg problem when it comes to designing the type.



  • Off topic: what's the font in the top sample?
  • No IDs please!
  • Well, that's not the usual case, where I bring the sample and ask for help identifying it. If someone uploads a sample, and the font looks interesting, I think it's fair to ask them for its identity. It's not going to deteriorate this forum into identifont.
  • edited November 27
    The top sample is Altivo by Nikola Kostić (Kostić Type). The bottom sample is Libertad by Fernando Díaz (TipoType). Should have said that right away when posting the samples.
  • Thanks :smile:
Sign In or Register to comment.