Early stage artdecorativish face. The whole thing started from the idea for the M' and from it to the N' and W' and the rest.
Have a lot of styling issues, but I'd like to get some feedback on it at this point, plus...
Does the M' W' work at all?
Am I stepping on someone's foot here?
Thanks


Comments
As for the M/W, if this were mine I might play with terminating the cross overs before they hit the stems.
Kinda reminds me of a Coquette eccentric relative.
I think I have fixed the X' strokes, made some other improvements and added cross bars to the O' G' D', I'm trying to maintain the closed-shapes aspect as with the W' M' for now.
The lowercase are still less developed.
That said, I have to work pretty hard to see the /m as an /m. Maybe a deeper cut on the vertex?
A lot depends on the eventual purpose of the design too. Eg, if it's targeting larger display use only, then legibility at a smaller scale isn't the biggest thing to get hung up on. But you can never really tell where it will end up so you have to be mindful of all use cases too.
You may want to think about a system for the curved serifs, at the moment they seem a bit randomised. Check out Museo which is the gold standard for this style of design. Observe which characters use serifs, and which don't, and how many etc. Don't clone it, but learn from it
A last general comment about the lowercase letters - while the proportions of uppercase look good to me, I think the lowercase proportions might need reviewing. for instance, /u and /n are very different in width, and /p/q/b/d need more breathing room in their counters. But for an early draft it's fairly good.
Flipping the W' to an M' doesn't work...
Widening it does, I think, as well as improving the serif system.
My focus is still on the Uppercase guys
PDF attached.
Actually, I find the new /M more legible than before. The /M/M is particularly nice!
I'm not so fond of the many stylistic inconsistencies e.g. within and between /A/H/I/N/T, though.
Guess I'll have to kill that I'...
Yeah, the /I looks like it belongs to a Tuscan typeface. The asymmetry in /A and /H also strikes me as a bit contrived (I like it in /E). The /L could use a spur on the bottom left, and the thinning in /N doesn't match the handling of such intersections in other letters.
It is your design though - so take it or leave it
I feel that the k'w's' are too foreign among the lc, not sure about leaving it like this or normalising them, leaving the bagel knots on the uc only?
If this hodgepodge style is deliberate, you might even consider making a few contextual alternates to add more variability.
The /c looks dangerously like an /e. The /X/x feel more like /V/v or even /Y/y to me. The /T feels weak among the other capitals, maybe give it a serif or two on the crossbar. The /f/g feel lopsided.
Maybe the uncomfortable crossings in /k/s could be resolved by making the arcs larger, e.g. starting them on the baselines. I don't mind the /w, but I would lighten the «roof» a bit.
Will consider all your other remarks, thanks!