The best "flavor" suitable for an Italic is simply to mark emphasis, not to appear more informal, organic, fluid, etc. Because the emphasized word doesn't necessarily need that; in fact it's likely to backfire, because what it probably does need is to maintain the mood of the Roman, since that's what the designer explicitly chose.Christian Thalmann said:If people didn't want Italics to send a different message from Roman, they would just use Roman. The flavor of the Italics is part of the flavor of a serif typeface. A bad Italic is a good reason to reject a serif typeface for a project.
There is a deeper, functional richness than this garish, shrill thing we've simply grown complacent towards.it would greatly impoverish and cheapen a serif typeface.
Yes! Like the Koch form.Jürgen Weltin said:I’d also work on the 'g' to make it a bit «funnier».
As long as that's not what its Latin "y" looks like. :-)Ray Larabie said:Would it work in Cyrillic as well?