Zooby

Vasil Stanev

A little happy font in two versions I am drawing for fun

George Thomas

Nice!

Craig Eliason

I would try to fudge the shades so that all the counters are filled in (like ABEFSUW...) or they all contain some white (like DEGOPQR...)

Vasil Stanev

Craig Eliason said:

I would try to fudge the shades so that all the counters are filled in (like ABEFSUW...) or they all contain some white (like DEGOPQR...)

I'm not sure if some of the eyes don't stand out just a tiny bit too much, in that way. 

Craig Eliason

They do; you'd probably want to make the counters smaller, if you go that route.

Toby Lebarre

Lower case ?

Vasil Stanev

Toby Lebarre said:

Lower case ?

Same as the UC.
  

Nick Shinn

If you want the Shadow version to have smoother typographic colour (as determined by its positive/black elements), you will have to adapt the Plain version in anticipation. The H and U, for instance, should be widened, so that the width of the positive stroke in the counter is not “extrusion + outline”. Similarly, lessen the top of the vertical right side of G so that it doesn’t touch the rest of the letter in the Shadow version. Then you have to decide, will that compromise the Fill too much?

One can’t expect the same glyph shape to work perfectly for both “Shadow” and “Fill”, with any substantial amount of weight in the “Plain/Fill” or extrusion in the “Shadow”.

A Shadow + Fill typeface should be conceived as such, with both versions developed concurrently, and not just spinning off the Shadow once the Plain is finished.  

Vasil Stanev

@Nick Shinn
Thank you for your input, insightful and useful as always.