Hey everyone,
I'm a graphic design student getting into type design, I was looking to get some general critique on the typeface I've been working for the past couple of months. What started as a generic geo sans to the learn the basics of type design developed into a (still pretty generic) neo-grotesque of sorts, mainly taking inspiration from workhorse sans such as Univers. I really like the idea of a fairly flexible and neutral sans I can use in a range of applications. Currently I've got a regular weight with the basic alphabet and some test glyphs of bold, condensed and extended versions.

Main issues I've been having:
- I've had alot of trouble with the /a, something about it just doesn't feel right with how it fits in the design as a whole, perhaps it needs to be a bit wider?
- I'm unsure if the alternative glyphs (on page 3) should be the default glyphs (particularly the G and R) or should be there at all
- I noticed it's common for single-storey g's in to have the bowl sitting higher than normal, which I assume is to increase the white space in the tail, but I'm not sure if this is something I should try implement.
- I've got some basic metrics spaced for text size (no kerning yet), but I feel as though it might be a bit too loose
Some things that have already flagged since putting together this PDF:
- I need to make the capitals smaller than the ascenders
- The capitals are slightly too dark
- The /x and /X need reworking, the "overlap" is a bit of a mess
- The condensed version is too dark, needs optical compensation
Any comments are appreciated!
Comments
Alt /G/ is far better. Scrap the default.
I would try raising /g/‘s bowl.
To my eyes spacing feels loose but not inappropriately so for text with this kind of design.
When judging cap weight set a paragraph of all caps text next to a lowercase paragraph to compare color. If these caps are too dark it’s only by a hair.
/Z/z/ have too much contrast.
/r/ arm maybe is too light.
Your alternate 'a' (the two story one) is much more conformist, and fitting, but the maybe still a tad narrow for the genre. As for the 'G' with the pronounced bar: It's hard to do a decidedly bland typeface that does however feature letters breaking that characterlessness without looking gimmicky. Alternates like for the 'R' seem like indecisiveness to me.
I like the comparably overwide bars of 't' and 'f' of the extended, as they start to have a bit their own vibe, but unfortunately also break from the more constrained character. Maybe subtle things like that could be something to experiment with and use to adjust the design a bit out of the replication exercise area into something more of its own, challenging as it might be at this stage.
Descenders seem unusually short to me.
I feel somewhat committed to slightly “calligraphic” early grotesque style /r, I do find it challenging though to balance it for text and display applications. Does this slight misalignment of the /r and /t crossbar when tracked tightly irk anyone else? XD
Regarding the alternatives, indecisive is definitely the right word. I feel some alternative glyphs offered in typefaces come across as indecisiveness or come out fear of failure, which I can definitely relate to.
That rtz looks fine (though I think the z and t horizontals could be a bit thicker).
"With Atlas Grotesk, we had an idea at one point to release two versions of it, because Kai had done a version with oblique terminals, more Akzidenz Grotesk style. We very nearly went through with it, except it seemed slightly too much like a non-choice. Like we were abdicating our responsibility as type designers saying it could be whatever."—Christian Schwartz
I think in this case it ultimately comes from having an overly loose brief or goal in mind.
Does anyone know of any humanist style sans that are rigid and serious in tone? FF Meta comes to mind, maybe Praxis to some extent minus the rounded edges.
At first thought, anyway... I am open to being persuaded by a fabulous counterexample.
In the end this really brings you back to the core of designing and how solving a problem is different from finding an aesthetic, and bravo for that!
Here I tried it out with square tittles.
I initially had in mind that as the weight increases, in addition to increase on contrast, the curves would start to square off to increase counter space. The extended version would close up and the condensed version would do the opposite, while keeping the 90 degree cuts. Definitely some things to consider as I keep exploring!
@Jasper de Waard Yes absolutely! Big fan of his work. "Adrian Frutiger - Typefaces: The Complete Works" is a must read.
I think at this point I need to step back, leave the drawing for a while and readdress what I’m trying to achieve here, before experimenting further and deciding on the final direction. Thanks everyone for the feedback!