So I have dusted off this typeface that I started around two years ago. I actually started out creating the lowercase letters, based on some illustrations and loose text sketches of mine. [background info: I also work as illustrator / graphic designer] But it wasn't until I started working on the capitals that I felt something good was happening. I included the lowercase in the pdf, but I might (read: probably will) ditch them and keep this an uppercase only typeface, as it will be a display typeface.
I've been having issues with the /C /G /O and /Q before, but I think I have them in good shape now. The /S was hard to develop but I'm pretty happy with that one too. So far I haven't come up with a better name than the working title 'Inky' but I'm seriously starting to dislike that, so I'll need to think up something else...


No kerning or anything just yet, these words are put together by hand.
Suggestions or comments are more than welcome!
Comments
/A/'s triangular counter looks a little too pinched closed.
Granted, the thickness doesn't work the same way (under the same angle) per letter, but still. The /S /N and /V have similar widths as the /O here. More contrast in the other letters feels like a good way to go, will start working on that, there's a number of letters that don't have this thinness anywhere indeed.
Might be good to mention that I didn't set out to create a brush typeface, but now it seems to evolve into one. Although I'm not sure if I want it to be a typical brush typeface. In other words, if I don't follow all the brush type rules, I'm ok with that. Most of my inspiration for this comes from personal letter illustrations and sign-painted letters, some from brush script. So we'll see how it evolves
And yes, some inconsistency and unevenness is what I'd prefer, but there's always a middle way of course.
Michael: Most of the difficulty in finding the right form for the /O /G etc has been with offsetting the inner ellipse wrt the outer one. So good call there. I've tried various combinations but it all felt wrong until I tried the current approach. See some of the previous forms here (the top row are the 'original' lowercase letters I started out with). Right side are the latest forms...
Also tried your /Q idea, Michael, what do you think?
Georg: interesting idea, that would indeed be a 'brush' type approach, I'll try that!
Also have been trying to get more contrast into the other letterforms, but that doesn't work out well for every form (most likely because I am applying it in the wrong way). For example in the /L or /Z - not sure if the 'old' ones aren't actually better... Here's an image comparing the old and new version:
Trying to develop those:
Some test words, three variants
Kinda liking that last /G there
I feel this bump you have made for the new /O is a bit too noticeable compared to those I mentioned previously. You could make the counter of /O almost oval, maybe a little subtle corner where there is bump now. And make the bump on outside circle of /O more subtle.
It also feels that the stem of /P is a bit too light. Especially in the word "GAPS". And maybe the /L is a bit wide. There is quite a lot whitespace between /L and /S in last word.
Not sure yet if that is really what I'm after though - have to consider it. From a logical standpoint it would make sense to do it. Then again, I really like that /S for example - so it's either a case of kill your darlings or cherish them... I'll give it time
I was thinking that about the bump in the /O as well, it's definitely a larger gap than the connections of brush strokes in other letters (if that's how you'd see it). There's something there.
To me the /T isn't working as well as it should now... too much contrast in the cross stroke maybe? And too much of a blob at the bottom...
Completely right about the /P, too light. I will try a less wide /L too, good call. Thanks!
Some text tests in the attached specimen by the way... (no kerning)
I agree that the O treatment should be more subtle.
This is really looking good.
Attached is a new version of the sampler (pdf) with new /C /E /F /G /N /O /U /T /V /W
Not sure about going back to that /G with the stroke. It does make more sense as Georg said, but I do still kinda like that other /G too.
Small image comparing the old (bottom and new (top) version. Larger version here
And here is a list of some basic kerning pairs for caps:
HHATAHH HHTÆHH
HHAUAHH HHUÆHH
HHAVAHH HHVÆHH
HHAWAHH HHWÆHH
HHAYAHH HHYÆHH
HHAOAHH HHAQAHH HHACHH HHDAHH
HHOÆHH HHDÆHH HHQÆHH
HHOTOHH HHQTQHH HHDTHH HHTCHH
HHOVOHH HHQVQHH HHDVHH HHVCHH
HHOWOHH HHQWQHH HHDWHH HHWCHH
HHOXOHH HHQXQHH HHDXHH HHXCHH
HHOYOHH HHQYQHH HHDYHH HHYCHH
HHKOHH HHKCHH HHKQHH
HHLOHH HHLCHH HHLQHH
HHFAHH HHFÆHH
HHPAHH HHPÆHH
HHSYHH HHYSHH
HHBTHH
HHBVHH
HHBYHH
HHFJHH
HHGYHH
HHLTHH
HHLUHH
HHLVHH
HHLWHH
HHLYHH
HHPJHH
HHPXHH
HHRTHH
HHRUHH
HHRVHH
HHRWHH
HHRYHH
HHTJHH
HH‘AHH HHA’HH HH’AHH HHL’HH
HH“AHH HHA”HH HH”AHH HHL”HH
HH'A'HH HHL'HH HH"A"HH HHL"HH
HH.O.HH HH.T.HH HH.U.HH HH.V.HH HH.W.HH HH.Y.HH
HHD.HH HHF.HH HHP.HH
HH,O,HH HH,T,HH HH,U,HH HH,V,HH HH,W,HH HH,Y,HH
HHD,HH HHF,HH HHP,HH
HHK-HH HHL-HH
HH-T-HH HH-V-HH HH-W-HH HH-X-HH HH-Y-HH HH-Z-HH
HHT:HH HHV:HH HHW:HH HHY:HH
HHT;HH HHV;HH HHW;HH HHY;HH
Sorry for tweaking your image but I thought it would be easier to show rather than try to write what I mean.

I dropped that bump a little so the top part of /S is a bit more round.But that /S without a bump is also nice.
@Mika Melvas: no problem at all, this is very helpful. Best way to show it if you ask me, thanks for taking the time to do that!
@Christian Thalmann: I think how you draw the /O depends on culture and custom. Lots of brush / sign typefaces have the connection on this end, others have it more on the left side. Or maybe it depends on lowercase / uppercase?
See for example:
Then again, the bump/connection in the /O might be odd just like the one in the /S
Also, @Craig Eliason, I'm starting to feel that the letters you pointed out in the beginning of this thread (/O /C /G) might indeed have too much contrast. I tried adding more to the other letters, but as I'm working I feel that I'm slowly undoing that. A bit less contrast in these letters might actually be a better solution...
(or see here to see them alternating in one gif)
To continue the point, consider this, here Seb Lester is definitely starting on the right side of the /o. Or this variant, about (granted) copperplate writing, similar approach.
I'm sure there will be samples of the opposite as well though.