It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
For display it's Ok. For body text, it needs ample spacing (and bigger /a /e counters)
Hrant H. Papazian said:
Deviating from 1000 is –still– problematic; if you're that close to it, make the effort to snap to it (probably by increasing the x-height instead of decreasing ascenders). A small talus above is useful, to accommodate some of the cap accent extension.
Honestly, all the typefaces mentioned so far have little relation to Garamond.
On the other hand, that angled top seems out of place among those other numerals. I guess a flat top would also be more in line with the Garamond /1:
I've started to worry about whether the ascender height was too large, though. I noticed the difference is much smaller in Garamond. Perhaps that's why Eau has a bit of an unruly feel to it in text settings?
I also added an intermediate weight between my previous Regular and Medium. I called the new one Regular (since I think it makes the best text weight, see below) and the previous Regular Semilight (for lack of a better term).
Otherwise very nice and interesting !
I have the idea to draw a sans for my Geranium, but my eyes are turned on Palatino sans for that kind of details (not for the general drawing of course).
I did notice that /e tends to fill up rather quickly even at moderate sizes, though. I guess I will make a Text cut of the typeface with larger counters in /a/e, as I did with the «Garamond» series of Cormorant.
EDIT: Alright, I made some alternates for /a/e (bottom is new), although it pains me to look at that Baskervillesque /a up close. . I'll take them for a ride on the test site as soon as I've written some instances that implement these by default.
For a design with such a small x-height a talus of 50 is too much.
A small talus above is useful, to accommodate some of the cap accent extension.
(A deck version is planned, in the middle of both, at some point in the future).
So I guess it would mean going through my rescaled monoline with a fine-toothed comb. This had better be worth it.
Is it possible to apply scaling from the baseline to a batch of glyphs with RMX Tools? I know they're good at things like «make the glyph wider by +20 units», but this is a different job...
Your take is lacking someting substantial. It is too constructed. Looking at the row of your alphabet, it is falling apart at least from the letter ›s‹ on. Especially this one is like from a geometric typeface (reminds me very much of Futura). The bow of ›t‹ is too round. I like your take on the ›a‹, but even ›b, d, p and q‹ are way too constructed.
I advise to have a look at the above mentioned typefaces, and especially at the work of Chris Brand, whose Sans never was executed as a working font, unfortunately.
My two cents,
Jürgen: We'll have to disagree on that. I like where Eau is going, and it does not feel geometric or constructed to me. This verdict seems all the stranger to me given the fact that you like Syntax, The Typeface Made From Elbows.
The /bdpq in Syntax are essentially a clone army, the /bdqpmn would feel right at home in a grotesque, and the /eag are just really ungainly. The Eau letters, on the other hand, I find more humanist, more harmonious, and more beautiful.
Yes, my /kvwxyz are very geometric and constructed, but that's the very nature of those letters (they are pretty unimaginative in Garamond as well). At least mine have the decency of lining up with the baseline and x-height rather than elbowing this way and that like Syntax.
The round foot of /t is, admittedly, a bit of indulgence on my side. I'm in love with the brazenly low and wide /t of the Carolingian minuscule, and I strive after that idea with all of my typefaces. The Garamond /t is beautifully low, but a bit too timid for my taste, so I made it wider and gave it a proper foot.
And what's supposed to be particularly geometric about this /s?
BTW, he may be a little harsh in his criticisms, but Syntax is by no means perfect. Sometimes pioneers or classics are thought of as religious icons. They hold an important place in history and some deserve a certain respect, but people are too often afraid to call out their faults.
What aspects of global «performance» would you recommend me to test and improve?
EDIT: I see you added /Q as an example. It's a guilty pleasure, I admit, but one that EB Garamond also indulges in, so I figured I'd be in good company. Should I deactivate the contextual alternates in the text cut?
Jürgen’s objection to your ‘s’ may have something to do with your decision to close the apertures. You could treat your ‘s’ like Blokland did in his two faces above: by interpreting the Garamond endings as serifs, not part of the main stroke. Consider outward facing terminals, rather than curved terminals. Maybe that will stray too far from Garamond, I dunno.
Start testing your glyphs in texts having many paragraphs. Don't study the letters alone, but in the context of their neighbors.
Basically, so far you have been working at the "Letter" level (one by one), or at the "Sentence" level (a few words in a short sentence).
Next move is to start working at the Paragraph level (testing in long texts).
Glyphs is a bit slow to work when you have lot of text on the edit view.
So I use the Tools section of the testing page for at
It's similar to Adhesion text, but you can drop the font right there, so you work faster by avoiding the hassle of typing, copying, pasting, etc. It's really fast.
There are also some extra tips: Try seting the size to something like 18px, then try 200px, and 300px. You will get different cascade views.
Also, for seeing the letters in the context of their neighbors, try the "Spacing Grid" and "Connections Grid" tabs in the same page. I use them all the time.
If you like to print, you can print directly from the browser.
Using those tools alone, will allow you for great and very fast progress, since the design or spacing errors become self-evident, and you will be able to notice then on your own, much faster, as long as you keep a critic look.
Also, the Latin-2 page includes a lot if "In Context" content. It's really useful.
I like very much the "Newspaper Headlines" tab, where I collect real world headlines from multiple newspapers.
I export my working fonts basically after any small change, and drop it on the tools section to confirm if the change was good or bad. I rename the fonts, adding and ending suffix, like "-v0001a" "-v0001b" "-v0001c" "-v0001d" etc... once the change or the letter is good to go, and I move to another letter, I keep renaming as "-v0002a" "-v0002b" "-v0002c" and so on.
By renaming, it enables me drop both, the before and after version on the Testing page, and switch quickly between the 2 or 3 options I'm reviewing each time.
This is how the folder where I generate my testing fonts usually looks like:
It depends what one considers “essence”.
“Eau” is focused on skeletal form, but stress, contrast and serif style are equally significant markers of “Garamond”. I designed the monoline Bodoni Egyptian as an alternative to the notion that fundamentally Bodoni = High Contrast, because I felt that Giambattista’s letter shapes were also quite distinctive in their own right, but I don’t see the traditional equation being replaced any time soon! Same for “Garamond”, which is similarly tied to a particular kind of pen nib that profoundly informs its character. This is apparent in the /a, which, as has been pointed out, clutters up in a monoline weight of any substantial heft—this letter shape, as originally conceived, is quite dependent on the thin aspect of the broad nib.