Options

type critic: "Wollner" a neo-grotesk (neo grotesque) sans-serif inspired by Alexandre Wollner

2»

Comments

  • Options
    DiegoSouzaDiegoSouza Posts: 53
    /z and maybe /w may be too narrow. There's some lingering awkwardness in the humps of /h/n/m (looks thick at 12 o'clock and pinched at 2 o'clock). 
    i've be dealing with the z dilemma before, but when i make it larger for me it just looks extremely agressive! 

    i don't feel like it's natural 

  • Options
    Craig EliasonCraig Eliason Posts: 1,409
    edited May 1
    Perhaps just lengthening the top horizontal (and potentially the bottom one a tiny bit too) would be enough to give it a substantial-enough width and also address the lean that @jeremy tribby mentioned. Of course, set it in real words to judge the adjustment. 
  • Options
    jeremy tribbyjeremy tribby Posts: 222
    edited May 1
    z is hard to judge in isolation but I agree with craig, I think the issue I saw is probably more about balancing what you had than widening the whole form
    This type is more of a tribute to wollner, it should remember helvetica/univers 
    fair enough! I'm glad you are keeping some of the more subtly unique features in any case; helvetica/univers would have been contemporary to wollner, but are more dated now; your own typeface can keep things contemporary through its own voice (and in that way, keep things related to wollner, beyond just the typefaces used)
  • Options
    DiegoSouzaDiegoSouza Posts: 53
    Update: 

    a bowl refined
    t ascender made shorter and horizontal stroke is bigger now and and the bottom horizontal stroke it's sligthly thicker (also the curve is thicker)
    f has it's horizontal strokes slightly reduced 
    h, m,n, p and q now has slight bent (to the left) top  vertical strokes, in my opinion it added more cleanness to the topand gave a illusion of more natural form meanwhile it still invisible to the everyday person 
    y now has it's left lateral stroke sligtly thicker 
    x has a lower contrast and a bigger bottom overall
    w vertex are now closer but it's perpendicular legs are more open now (compensation for the apex)
    z was almost completly redesigned the only thing that didn't changed was it's horizontal stroke height
    m,n and h bowels are more thick at two o'clock (recommendation that i took)
    j bottom curve also made thicker

    And for the for themost part i think that i'm good to go for the upper-case letters, i still having some issues with spacing and the letter g needs some attention too but overall i think that's a great start 
     





  • Options
    DiegoSouzaDiegoSouza Posts: 53
    i recently was adjusting the upper-case stroke thickness to match the lower-case ones, i think that i found a sweet spot more to the slight thicker side but i think it's ok. 

    Typing some word i've tried Europe e i think it's beatiful even without E bearings adjusted, thinks seems to go together now!


  • Options
    Thomas PhinneyThomas Phinney Posts: 2,764
    Lots of things are working now! Definitely getting there.

    Small detail: your baseline is the baseline, but the x-height is set to the overshoot rather than the “flat” x-height. If you have blue zones or auto-hinting happening, you will want to fix that.

    There are a lot of weight inconsistencies still.

    The a seems much heavier than the o. I look at how much the p thins at the joins and wonder why the a does less at the bottom and not at all at the middle.

    The outer curve of the p seems heavier than the same part of the o.

    The vertical parts of u look thinner than the bottom curve

    The cap E seems a lot heavier than the lowercase. Normal difference in a regular weight would be for the equivalent strokes in a capital letter to be 4–10% heavier. This seems like quite a bit more than that.
  • Options
    DiegoSouzaDiegoSouza Posts: 53
    @Thomas Phinney thanks for the alerts/tips, the middle of the a was thinner in older versions but after many increments i made it thicker and only slightly thinner than a horizontal stroke, i found it to be distinctive  and mixing well with the letters. I'm going to try to follow your tips and give it more balance, but i don't think that i'm going to throw off the thick middle soon... 
  • Options
    Thomas PhinneyThomas Phinney Posts: 2,764
    Maybe a slightly thinner join on that middle would be good. But overall, it just looks heavier than other letters. Perhaps best to re-evaluate after making some other adjustments, though.

    Don’t let the criticisms fool you, though! This has come a long way—congrats! First typefaces are hard....
  • Options
    DiegoSouzaDiegoSouza Posts: 53
    oh well... trying to fix the pqdb inconsistency i've found very dificult to achieve balance with that width so i made it bigger, then the bpdq at that point where the dissonant voices. So yeah everybody now is bigger.

    after i found very difficult to match the same shape balance with a wider form, specially some letters like a that now is basically a whole new thing. 

    Now i'm looking to the work partially done i it's left a after taste of lost progress! 


  • Options
    DiegoSouzaDiegoSouza Posts: 53
    @Thomas Phinney

    and i almost forgot, you're right all the time there was a overshoot issue, not because of clipping but because it was small, now everybody is a little taller too 
  • Options
    DiegoSouzaDiegoSouza Posts: 53
    some bearings adjestment and redrawing after... 

    there we go:


    missing letters are scheduled for adjustments 


Sign In or Register to comment.