Numerals
Ori Ben-Dor
Posts: 386
One moment I think 6 & 9 are too wide or their bowls are too large, the next moment I think they're just about the right size. (When I tested narrower/smaller versions, it was the opposite: one moment I thought it was too narrow/small, the next moment it looked to me alright.)
What do you think?
Other comments are welcome as well.
What do you think?
Other comments are welcome as well.
1
Comments
-
Looks like 0 and 8 might be a bit too narrow.1
-
I'll play with it, thanks.0
-
I rather thought 4 might be a bit wide. Nice and chunky shapes though.
1 -
I'll look into that too, thanks.0
-
4/5/6/9 have become a bit narrower.
0/3/8 a bit wider.
0 -
The interesting construction of the 4 isn't echoed anywhere else. Maybe the beak of the 1 is flat, rather than curved?0
-
If your opinion is alternating it means it's right on. :->
Biggest problems I'm seeing:
— The "4" is quite unhappy.
— The bottom of the "2" appears too heavy.
0 -
Hrant H. Papazian said:— The "4" is quite unhappy.0
-
Marc Oxborrow said:The interesting construction of the 4 isn't echoed anywhere else. Maybe the beak of the 1 is flat, rather than curved?0
-
The three diagonals are fighting. And the stub is too short; might be best to simply ax it.1
-
The bottom of 2 is now a bit lighter. I've also changed 4 a little, not sure if it's happier now (but I suspect it's too heavy now, I'll have to see if I still suspect that tomorrow).
I think I've also narrowed 3 by 1 or 2 points. Probably no one can tell.
I'll try Marc's suggestion when I have more time.0 -
Is the symmetrical construction of the 8 deliberate? I thought you generally need the top bowl smaller than the bottom, but I would be interested to hear if there are good reasons for an exception.
0 -
The top bowl is smaller:
2 -
So it is! Off to the opticians...2
-
the width of the diagonals on 4679 might vary too much0
-
Don't you think it add a little spice?2
-
I am not sure, I think it is a little too much. 7 and 9 are where it's most apparent to me. but if the flavor of these numerals suits the other characters maybe it is fine.
from left to right, I overlaid some other sans, Futura, DIN, yours, aligned at bottom right corner -- look at the bit of magenta sticking out at the bottom left,
0 -
Alright, I'll play with that. Thanks!0
-
This is more conventional. Jeremy, do you like it better now? I think it's lost some character and balance.
0 -
Agree...with the 3rd sentence. If you keep second guessing yourself you'll spoil it. Commit and move on.1
-
Hmm, looking at it both ways I am less sure, because you are right, it does lose something. Ignore me and carry on0
-
I am pretty committed to the widening diagonals, I was just experimenting with Jeremy's idea
0 -
The flaring diagonals are nice. But in the "4" they're still causing trouble with the one in the short stem.0
-
In a way that the experimental version resolves?
(I must admit I don't quite see the problem there. I see the complexity, but it doesn't seem to me problematic. I would like to dwell on that, though, if that's okay. I'm just a beginner and I have plenty to learn.)0 -
I would just match the (apparent) incline of the stem's diagonal with the middle one. And I still think the short stub on the right is out of character.0
-
Something like this?
0 -
Oh, you probably mean the other way around:
0 -
Yes, but now it looks too open. :-/
Maybe it should just be straight.0 -
?0
-
I like it. Maybe raise the stem sightly.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 43 Introductions
- 3.7K Typeface Design
- 801 Font Technology
- 1K Technique and Theory
- 618 Type Business
- 444 Type Design Critiques
- 542 Type Design Software
- 30 Punchcutting
- 136 Lettering and Calligraphy
- 83 Technique and Theory
- 53 Lettering Critiques
- 483 Typography
- 301 History of Typography
- 114 Education
- 68 Resources
- 498 Announcements
- 79 Events
- 105 Job Postings
- 148 Type Releases
- 165 Miscellaneous News
- 269 About TypeDrawers
- 53 TypeDrawers Announcements
- 116 Suggestions and Bug Reports