Hi ! I was working for about a week on another Quatrocento project. Some times ago I designed Uccello based on the Jenson Roman. Now I am trying to do something around Griffo's typeface for Pietro Bembo. While I had fairly high resolution of Jenson prints I don't have of Griffo's one. However the reproductions of De Aetna on Archive.org are a good base to improvize something different. Another interesting challenge in my learning curve.
At the moment there is no kerning ; this is more visible on capitals.
Thanks for any comment !
Comments
I like these threads because they lead my eye to quirky details I'd overlooked (here like the difference in /B serif lengths, the tall /c, the different heights of /m humps...)
- make curves less bumpy by adjusting the bezier curves (you may take the help of "Harmonize" or something similar) and/or removing unneccessary points
- reconsider the thin lines and bows: e.g. the top of the \o is significantly stronger than the bottom right of the \q at the moment
- make the overshoot of \C,\O,\G bigger
- make the serifs more consistent (e.g. the serifs of the \S are stronger than the serifs of the \T)
- rework the \A and the \B (consider taking other examples of \A and \B from the original)
- do not bend the \h that much at the bottom right
Keep it up, you are on a good way!Interestingly enough, Monotype's Poliphilus (based on Aldus' typeface for the Hypnerotomachia Poliphilii, which as we all know here differed only in its upper case from that of De Aetna) didn't have either of those characteristics.
However, I must agree with Mr Eliason. The sample you've shown us looks too skinny and a bit washed out. I've seen good scans of De Aetna where the heftiness of typeface really comes through, and it's lovely. An unbelievable balance of thick strokes and thin joints. I don't know how they did it, but I've never seen it in any modern revivals.