Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 4.3K All Categories
- 31 Introductions
- 3.4K Typeface Design
- 702 Font Technology
- 985 Technique and Theory
- 525 Type Business
- 411 Type Design Critiques
- 513 Type Design Software
- 29 Punchcutting
- 122 Lettering and Calligraphy
- 72 Technique and Theory
- 50 Lettering Critiques
- 419 Typography
- 267 History of Typography
- 102 Education
- 50 Resources
- 453 Announcements
- 68 Events
- 100 Job Postings
- 140 Type Releases
- 144 Miscellaneous News
- 253 About TypeDrawers
- 51 TypeDrawers Announcements
- 107 Suggestions and Bug Reports
Komik Ohne: A casual brush-pen blackletter
Christian Thalmann
Posts: 1,836
Here's something I've been doodling with my brush pens for a while now. I'm getting to the point where I like it enough to commit some type work to it to see where it might lead. I'm pretty bad at brush pens — especially at getting thin lines out of them —, so have mostly low-contrast strokes to work with. Still, between the subtle modulation within the strokes and some local lightening through loosely-joined strokes, the style is workable for blackletter.
The working title of this is currently Komik Ohne, a tongue-in-cheeck bad German translation of Comic Sans. I'm calling this the blackletter equivalent of Comic Sans, in the hopes of making a little PR out of the latter's pop culture status. «Use Komik Ohne for job applications, scientific presentations, monument inscriptions, etc. — basically, wherever you would use Comic Sans!» 
(I might switch to a more serious name later.)
First glyphs:
Whaddya think?
2
Comments
I wasn't going to use fine embellishments, originally, but tried it out and liked it so much that it stuck. I'm most likely going to make a series of caps without those (but retaining the full-weight interior architecture such as the splotches) for a stylistic set.
In any event, its good to see a little more of it and I definitely think it's worth developing further.
Something that stikes me about your second image (and this might be purely down to my viewing it on my mobile) is that words consisting of predominantly upright letters, such as /minimum, appear to lean slightly to the left. I don't see the same effect in /omino, even though both words contain /I, /m and /n.
Again, could be the size of my display playing tricks on my eyes, so it would be interesting to know if you see this too.
I really enjoy this typeface overall, and I think you are on to something. Round brush sans serif stencil blackletter....
Think of how animation characters are more interesting if they have both types of forms instead of one. E.g. the human leg has a straight front side and oval/curvy back. A bubbly leg like a baloon animal or one made only of straight lines like the Tin Wooodman looks less natural.
In the case of your typeface, which I personally like, I fear the viewer might mostly be (unconsciously) confused, and thus doesn't associate it with very much at all. If I were you, I think I would make it a little more black-lettery, while retaining the brush feel. For example, you could increase the length and angle of the 'serifs'. Love the caps, btw.
You could go more blacklettery with the latter (as Jasper is advising) or less with the former (thinking more abstractly about models--the strokeless cap variants, which I find intriguing move in that direction).
I also want to chime in to share why I disagree with Simon. While I understand where you’re coming from Simon, I don’t believe aesthetics are inherently linked to “getting it” or having a deep understanding of typographic styles. It seems entirely limiting and nonconstructive to suggest that “thick, pointy and mëtäl” are the only successful or defining characteristics of blackletter to “non-type people.” And I say this because inventive takes on the style (like this one) are squandered when we simply adhere/conform to expectations or generalized ideals.
As a graphic designer, as someone who works with a well-respected designer, and as someone with many friends in the field, I must say that “liking something” and making purely aesthetic-based/intuitive decisions is not only a valid approach but also the primary means in which we work. But I do suspect that you’re pedantically caught on the term “like” because I’d suggest that our “unconscious response” is often whether or not we like it.
When I’m looking at type, whether by myself or with Louise (Fili), we aren’t seeking to answer “Do we understand this? Do we get it’s origins?” Instead, we’re trying to answer “Is this interesting? Does this fit our project? Does it contribute to it’s aesthetic message?”
With that being said. This is interesting, and it seems that everyone else agrees. Whether or not it needs to become more blackletter-like to become less of a “typographic in-joke” or to ensure people get it, I don’t think needs to be a primary concern. I’m more interested in seeing you continue to push this further. This has a very causal feel, and making it any more angular I fear will take-away from your intentions and your voice.
In terms of actual critique or comments, I’d like to see the breaks in the letterforms become more consistent. The top left of the e, s, and k for example are quite tight in comparison to the m, n, and o. I also really like the idea of including the simple alternate caps.
One last thing, if you were to explore a heavier weight, I’d love it if the gaps started to close/bleed together as opposed to preserving the separation. (But still make it evident that there are breaks in the strokes.)
Stem of /f/ (and long /s/) look stiffer than everything else. Tittles may be a touch too casual.
Should /ß/ have one more stencil break like /z/?
Although the two-story /a/ is handsome on its own, it may be that that the one-story version would be a more fitting default.
I don’t really see the usefulness of the alts, but anyway that /k/ seems relatively dark and dense, like it wants more stencil breaks.