Logotype turned Typeface

Scott Biersack
Scott Biersack Posts: 76
edited September 2017 in Type Design Critiques
Hey friends,

I'm looking for some thoughts / guidance on a new typeface underway (PDF attached)! A little background on this typeface: I completed this logotype months back and had a crazy amount of people asking when "that typeface would be released"...little did everyone know I had no plans (at the time) to build it out further. So, here I am building it out since there was a large interest.

Everything is still in the very early stages and would love some input on the glyphs drawn this far. I'm having troubles with the diagonals especially along with the M/N weight distribution. Also, if anyone have references of something similar to this, please share! I don't want to design something that's already been done of course. 

Thanks so much for your time



Tagged:

Comments

  • Ori Ben-Dor
    Ori Ben-Dor Posts: 386
    /S and /s - they're much more playful/less formal than all other characters. That's not necessarily a problem, but they should probably get serifs, at least.

    /M - the left stroke looks heavier than the right one (I guess they're identical, which means they shouldn't be).

    /N - I'd make the vertical strokes lighter.

    /A - too narrow?

    /g - too dark around the bottom?

    Could please upload a sample of all characters ordered alphabetically?
  • Craig Eliason
    Craig Eliason Posts: 1,436
    I like this a lot.
    Tail of /g/ might pinch a little too small. 
    If you plan for broader language support, you might want to get to trying out some diacritics to insure they work in that cramped ascender space.
  • Scott Biersack
    Scott Biersack Posts: 76
    @Ori Ben-Dor
    thanks so much for the feedback! Definitely agree with the "S's" feeling more playful. I feel the same way. Maybe I need to rethink that structure...OR add more playfulness to the other characters. 

    Here's an updated PDF with the alphabet like you asked. Hope that's what you're hoping to see? There's an alternate "a" in there with a funky "x" and and unresolved "z" ;)
  • Scott Biersack
    Scott Biersack Posts: 76
    @Craig Eliason
    Thank you Craig! Excellent point about the diacritics...I definitely need to test that out and see how it all works. Hope to explore this in various widths as well. 

    Thanks for your feedback! I definitely agree about the _g_
  • Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian
    Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian Posts: 2,044
    edited September 2017
    Although this isn't my own cup of tea. it's looking quite polished and seems likely to do well on the market.

    The one thing that seems off is the overshoots: not enough.

    I like the "M".
  • Scott Biersack
    Scott Biersack Posts: 76
    @Hrant H. Papazian
    Thanks Hrant! I'll take a look at those for sure. 
  • Jürgen Weltin
    Jürgen Weltin Posts: 18
    I’d also work on the 'g' to make it a bit «funnier».
  • Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian
    Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian Posts: 2,044
    Jürgen Weltin said:
    I’d also work on the 'g' to make it a bit «funnier».
    Yes! Like the Koch form.
    http://typedrawers.com/discussion/2328/1-5-stories-g/p1
  • Scott Biersack
    Scott Biersack Posts: 76
    Yes! Definitely agree. I'm working on some new forms as we speak
  • Christian Thalmann
    Christian Thalmann Posts: 1,983
    I love the /S/s, please don't break them. :grimace: Reminds me of Yanone Kaffeesatz and Antithesis.

    A two-storey /g would be fun, no doubt, but the Koch design ruins almost all typefaces it touches... maybe a true binocular design could work if you think of it as a single object to fill the available vertical space with, rather than a bowl and a tail.
  • Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian
    Hrant Հրանդ Փափազեան Papazian Posts: 2,044
    edited September 2017
    Christian Thalmann said:
    maybe a true binocular design could work if you think of it as a single object to fill the available vertical space with, rather than a bowl and a tail.
    That's how to think about it anyway.

    The Koch form is simply harder to pull off, because it's not taken for granted. The most common form of text "g", the closed-bottom binocular, is seriously flawed, topologically being more like a Chinese character than something belonging in the alphabet. We don't notice because it's under our skin.
  • Craig Eliason
    Craig Eliason Posts: 1,436
    I dunno, I feel like the existing /g/ is the right style for this design.
  • Christian Thalmann
    Christian Thalmann Posts: 1,983
    Craig Eliason said:
    I dunno, I feel like the existing /g/ is the right style for this design.
    I find its tail too timid and too cramped. I agree that a monocular design should work in principle. Perhaps raising the bowl significantly above the baseline and allowing the tail to grow to its full horizontal extent would help.
  • Scott Biersack
    Scott Biersack Posts: 76
    I appreciate all the input, guys! You've definitely given me a lot to consider. I am working on a two story alternate _g_ as well as adding a bit more character to the tail of the current _g_. @Craig Eliason, @Christian Thalmann, @Hrant H. Papazian

Categories