Skip to content
  • Register

    • Numerals

    Posts: 386
    in Type Design Critiques
    One moment I think 6 & 9 are too wide or their bowls are too large, the next moment I think they're just about the right size. (When I tested narrower/smaller versions, it was the opposite: one moment I thought it was too narrow/small, the next moment it looked to me alright.)

    What do you think?

    Other comments are welcome as well.

    Welcome!

    It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
    Sign In
    Register
    «1

    Comments

    • Posts: 641
      Looks like 0 and 8 might be a bit too narrow.
    • Posts: 386
      I'll play with it, thanks.
    • Posts: 1,999
      I rather thought 4 might be a bit wide. Nice and chunky shapes though.
    • Posts: 386
      I'll look into that too, thanks.
    • Posts: 386
      4/5/6/9 have become a bit narrower.
      0/3/8 a bit wider.
    • Posts: 220
      The interesting construction of the 4 isn't echoed anywhere else. Maybe the beak of the 1 is flat, rather than curved? 
    • Posts: 2,044
      If your opinion is alternating it means it's right on.  :->

      Biggest problems I'm seeing:
      — The "4" is quite unhappy.
      — The bottom of the "2" appears too heavy.
    • Posts: 386
      Hrant H. Papazian said:
      — The "4" is quite unhappy.
      I'm trying to figure out what you mean: would you say the previous version was happier, or is it the whole concept?
    • Posts: 386
      Marc Oxborrow said:
      The interesting construction of the 4 isn't echoed anywhere else. Maybe the beak of the 1 is flat, rather than curved? 
      I'll try your idea, thanks.
    • Posts: 2,044
      The three diagonals are fighting. And the stub is too short; might be best to simply ax it.
    • Posts: 386


      The bottom of 2 is now a bit lighter. I've also changed 4 a little, not sure if it's happier now (but I suspect it's too heavy now, I'll have to see if I still suspect that tomorrow).

      I think I've also narrowed 3 by 1 or 2 points. Probably no one can tell.

      I'll try Marc's suggestion when I have more time.
    • Posts: 764
      Is the symmetrical construction of the 8 deliberate? I thought you generally need the top bowl smaller than the bottom, but I would be interested to hear if there are good reasons for an exception.
    • Posts: 386
      The top bowl is smaller:


    • Posts: 764
      So it is! Off to the opticians...
    • Posts: 263
      the width of the diagonals on 4679 might vary too much
    • Posts: 386
      Don't you think it add a little spice?
    • Posts: 263
      edited July 2017
      I am not sure, I think it is a little too much. 7 and 9 are where it's most apparent to me. but if the flavor of these numerals suits the other characters maybe it is fine.

      from left to right,  I overlaid some other sans, Futura, DIN, yours, aligned at bottom right corner -- look at the bit of magenta sticking out at the bottom left, 



    • Posts: 386
      Alright, I'll play with that. Thanks!
    • Posts: 386


      This is more conventional. Jeremy, do you like it better now? I think it's lost some character and balance.

    • Posts: 1,452
      Agree...with the 3rd sentence. If you keep second guessing yourself you'll spoil it. Commit and move on.
    • Posts: 263
      Hmm, looking at it both ways I am less sure, because you are right, it does lose something. Ignore me and carry on  :)
    • Posts: 386
      I am pretty committed to the widening diagonals, I was just experimenting with Jeremy's idea :smile:
    • Posts: 2,044
      The flaring diagonals are nice. But in the "4" they're still causing trouble with the one in the short stem.
    • Posts: 386
      In a way that the experimental version resolves?

      (I must admit I don't quite see the problem there. I see the complexity, but it doesn't seem to me problematic. I would like to dwell on that, though, if that's okay. I'm just a beginner and I have plenty to learn.)
    • Posts: 2,044
      I would just match the (apparent) incline of the stem's diagonal with the middle one. And I still think the short stub on the right is out of character.
    • Posts: 386
      Something like this?


    • Posts: 386
      Oh, you probably mean the other way around:

    • Posts: 2,044
      edited July 2017
      Yes, but now it looks too open.  :-/
      Maybe it should just be straight.
    • Posts: 386
      ?
    • Posts: 2,044
      edited July 2017
      I like it. Maybe raise the stem sightly.

    Welcome!

    It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
    Sign In
    Register

    Welcome!

    It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
    Sign In
    Register

    Quick Links

    Categories