Book Cover Lettering

Tristan Bowersox

I am revisiting the lettering I did for the cover of a novel on the occasion of its sequel coming out. In retrospect, some of the choices I had made were odd, especially having the stress on the upstrokes of the loops... The original and my second take on it are below. I think it's more legible and more consistent, but if there are any critiques you have, fire away. I retained the descender on the /k/ even although I could no longer find an example of it elsewhere...I don't know; it seemed to fit the casual feel of the text composition...

I'll post the sequel's title when I finish it.

Martin Silvertant

The second version looks much better. I think it could be improved more though, but I guess it also depends on what you want. I'm going to approach this more or less as a type designer where I look for a certain consistency which may not apply in lettering if you want to keep a certain spontaneity and playfulness in the lettering.

I think the weight could be more consistent. Right now you seem to have areas that are darker and some areas that are lighter. The /o in "Mountain" for example could use a smaller and thicker loop like the first /o, or perhaps no loop this time. The /a is too light on the right side, and perhaps /t would work better without a loop as its stem. Perhaps I would also try to bring "Mountain" to the right, "Angels" to the left and give the /M a swash on the left side.

Steve Gardner

Hi Tristan... I agree with Martin that the second version looks better.

A couple of observations about Ver 2:

The leg of the /R/ looks very light to me when compared with the stem... possibly the bowl too?

The /R/ and /k/ have similar forms. Is it possible to misread as either "Kocky" or "Rocry"?

The contiguous /ch/ ligature in Ver 1 works better for me than the update; the loop on the /k/ in Ver 2 looks abandoned.

You mentioned that you'd retained the descending /k/, which I agree fits the casual composition. It harmonises with the descending /g/ in "Angels", but leaves "Mountain" looking very orderly by comparison.

Tristan Bowersox

Thank you both for your comments; they are very astute.

I have the type for the second book here. I would put it up in the original post, but I can't seem to remember how to edit posts...

I'll revise the "Rocky Mountain" part and post it later...

Tristan Bowersox

Revised version attached for comparison. Playful spontaneity was indeed my aim, so aside from some thickening of strokes—mainly in the /R and /a—I left it inconsistent, and rather, as Steve implicitly suggested, shook up the orderly "Mountain" with a swash in the middle.

As for a swash on the /M, I am considering that for at least the "Rock Mountain Series" wordmark I am working on, and possibly for the R.M. Sunrise cover, as both are less compositionally constricted by cover imagery.

Edit: here's a version with the swash:

Martin Silvertant

It looks a lot better and more consistent. I think I would make the /R a bit lighter and make the swash of /e more circular, because the current shape feels uncomfortable to me. Other than that I think it works quite well.

StephenRapp

The 2 biggest improvements I can think of are:
1. Make the the thick/thin contrast of the lowercase (ountain & unrise) the standard and use it on the caps and flourishes. The M and S and flourishes seem to have very little contrast.
2. Change the slant on the R to better match the rest of the lettering.

attar

Personally, I think it looks good as-is now. You don't want to fix it too much if you want to keep a certain organic flair, imo.

Stephen Coles

Adrien — Stephen's suggestion to correct the pen contrast will more accurately emulate handwriting, making it less mechanical, not more.

attar

Well, I guess I just lack experience with this stuff and lettering in general in order to be able to critique.

Martin Silvertant

Well, I guess I just lack experience with this stuff and lettering in general in order to be able to critique.

Perhaps not. The thing to remember is that although indeed a high consistency would normally suggest a less humanist approach when it comes to typefaces, within the realm of calligraphy you would expect a certain consistency in the stroke and contrast. Stephen's suggestions would increase the consistency of stroke and contrast — as if done by the same pen and hand — without sacrificing the design. In fact the suggestions he made would also improve the color (general distribution of black on white), so visually the design will look better as well.

Tristan Bowersox

Glad to see this is getting some more attention, though I'm fast approaching my deadline, so I'll have to see how much I can alter before then...

With regard to the swash on the /e, though, I can tell you that it is because of the way the title fits on the front cover. The Series logo, by contrast, is much rounder.

I will look again into adding contrast to the swashes. My feeling initially was that they distracted slightly from the text when they were thicker.

Thank you all for your suggestions.

Tristan Bowersox

Revision showing the addition of contrast to the curls. I have mixed feelings about it... I think it works in places, but the lower left one in particular looks slightly awkward and I can't place why...

Also, my wife noted that the swash on the /s looks like it doesn't belong. She said it reminded her of the long-toe boot fad in Mexico a few years ago, an image I can't unsee... =_=

[Edit]: Added contrast to the /R loop, rotated /R, and brought capital contrast closer to lowercase.

Pascal Barry

Hi there, I'm a letterer and will be posting stuff soon, so wanted to get involved with a few suggestions even though it seems like you're nearly there from all the posts.. Anyway, all subjective and just another perspective that I hope is helpful in some way. Forgive the messy markup, just find it quicker to than describing everything!
Cheers