I'm attempting to design a full face, extrapolating from a logo design (of mine). Very early stages and I'd love (and appreciate) any feedback or direction that anyone cared to levy. First draft of A-Z, plus a couple of numerals.
Original logo was for a cycling brand (can't post yet as we're yet to launch), but the vibe is sporty/tech.
I'm a graphic designer of 15+ years, but this is my first attempt at a full face.
All the characters in the original logotype had them; it added some interest, played into the sport/speed thing, and is worked well (enough) with those six characters.
Then, to outline my train of thought, as I sketched out the other characters, I guess I, A ) Wanted some variation, B ) Have a personal aversion to faces that rely too heavily on a quirk, especially when it's forced into characters 'against their will' (The 'S' would be a definite case in my eyes). Which led to this point.
I've tried alts for each of the characters where I've missed it off – I definitely feel it has more coherence (though it throws up a few different problems).
I can see this being used for titling in an action or comic book movie. Do you have a specific goal / use case in mind for it? Eg. Releasing to the public or just using it in house for your cycling client?
Just make sure that if you're doing a derivative work from a seperate client job, that they are cool with you extending it into a font. I assume you've already worked that bit out though!
(More soon, hopefully.)
The weakest glyphs seem to be "V", "X" and "Y". The "Z" just needs some playing around with the shear angles I think. Also the "M" feels like it has some unrealized potential, somehow.
A lot of little things to tweak too, but later...
I see what you mean about the G. The Q has that thick slug that looks appealing and speedy...maybe something there?
Yes, the "Q" also has that certain something (even though at first blush I thought I hated it).
Thanks all, some great notes there, and I will take it all on board and post the next round asap. Will just address some specific points here (just for background).
Ray LarabieHrant H. PapazianJasper de Waard The 'G' is a weird one. I thought I hated it, but then flip-flopped and decided I loved it. The other guy in the studio working with me on this hates it still. The angle on the G does currently match the K, which is also the angle of the on-strokes. The 'R' started off matching, but has gone its own way – I'll try and pull it back around.
Chris Drabsch The legal issues of the face aren't something I've thought about – while the client hasn't asked for it, I started fiddling with extended characters and numerals when they asked for some additional product coding (CX, 25.5, things like that), and just got carried away. If it's completed in enough time, I'd like to use it on their website, but it's largely just practice/portfolio work.
Ray LarabieHrant H. Papazian The Q is the character that's gone through the most iterations to date (bar the 'S') – I'll post its development (below). Totally agree that there's something problematic there (too much darkness down the bottom right), but that it has potential to be really fun too.
4. Couldn't agree more – I was wary of approaching this at all as I find most examples of the style to be overly simplistic, unfinished, or just ugly, and just because the six characters worked together in a logotype, there was no guarantee they'd survive in a breathing typeface. But whilst I'd love for this to 'stand out from the crowd', I'll take 'usable/legible' as a result for a first effort!
5. Thanks! I'm pleased with the 'K', probably my favourite character. (Also, relieved, as that's the first letter of the logotype, and probably the most recognised/important character to the brand).
6. Me too – what are your thoughts on inconsistency in the on-strokes? Worth doing for keeping the strength in the individual characters, or should I sacrifice that for a stronger theme across the whole face?).
Q2...try using the same thick slug for G.
S5 as 5
Secondly, in order to make those calls it is vital to look at the letters in context. Try them out in words, see which shapes are harmonious, which are legible, which stand out too much, etc. Then, if you still have doubts, show some samples of words (multiple different words per doubt) here, and see what people think.
B: Have you tried a narrower top bowl?
J: First one, with a smaller diagonal.
S: Second one, maybe with a shorter top.
U: Third one, but maybe with a serif*, and a bigger diagonal (like in the first "A").
W: First or second, depending*.
X: No good...
Y: None of them...
* If the serifs will be distributed without formal consistency then deciding where to put them becomes a tricky task; you'd need to do a lot of testing with words and letter adjacencies.