Another Geometric Sans

Addison Copas
Addison Copas Posts: 2
edited June 22 in Type Design Critiques
Hello! After a good few years silently lurking this forum, I suddenly feel ready to make some noise. 

This typeface has gone through many incarnations before now resembling my version of Futura. I doubled down on the features I like from the face (capitals with Roman proportions, the vertically sliced terminals of the /C) and replaced those I wasn’t as fond of (the single-story /a and small x-height). I’ve perhaps even made a world’s first with my /@ of which I’m very proud.

I may use it elsewhere as it develops, but it’s main use for the time being will be to set body copy on my website.

There are still some inconsistencies in weight which I must address, but rather than poke and prod endlessly at my own whims, I figured a few extra sets of eyes on her wouldn’t hurt.

I’d appreciate any and all advice—thank you in advance!

Tagged:

Comments

  • Stephen Coles
    Stephen Coles Posts: 1,021
    edited June 22
    Nice work! First thing that strikes me is that there is too much pinching on the /a bowl joins. Needs a little bit more meat there, particularly on the bottom. 
    The @ : I get the joy of inventing a new shape, but the interior reads as an o more than an a to me, sorry!
  • Craig Eliason
    Craig Eliason Posts: 1,469
    I’m not convinced that that /f makes sense for this face. It’s “eye-catching” in the bad sense of the term. Also, the crossbar of it and of /t could be a little thicker. Terminals of CGS feel a touch light.
  • jeremy tribby
    jeremy tribby Posts: 272
    bottom of J is a touch heavy
    the A feels a little narrow
    you could push the K and H and N wider, if you wanted
    can you show some capitals and lowercase together? I think xheight to cap height proportion can have a big influence on the overall feel of this genre in written text 
  • Christian Thalmann
    Christian Thalmann Posts: 2,025
    edited June 22
    I was pleasantly surprised by the caps! Very clean and elegant. Makes me think more of Gill Sans than of Futura. Only the /R/ sticks out to me as somewhat out of place — maybe because of the thinning on the underside of the bowl? Not sure. 
    The lowercase doesn't quite work for me, though. The /a/ is very eye-catching, and the /f/ strikes me as downright freaky in comparison to the level-headed rest of the typeface. Maybe reserve those as stylistic alternates and make some calmer defaults?
    Also, throughout the lowercase, the thinning of bowls when joining a stem strikes me as excessive. Maybe try reducing that a bit? This also affects your /at/, which I find quite fetching otherwise. 
  • Simon Cozens
    Simon Cozens Posts: 792
    Agree about the bowl thinning. This also affects underside of Q, particularly in the thin. I personally see a few tiny weight imbalances: stem of G too light maybe, corners or N too dark. /E terminals a bit distracting? And the tail of the Q is perhaps a little too cute.

    The /at/ is a bit distracting but the ampersand is an absolute keeper.
  • Addison Copas
    Addison Copas Posts: 2
    Thank you all for your responses—I’ll update once I have a chance to administer your feedback.

    @jeremy tribby Here are some capitals with lowercase for you. Note that I haven’t yet made any edits.

  • Christian Thalmann
    Christian Thalmann Posts: 2,025
    edited June 22
    Yeah, that /a/ pulls the emergency brakes on the reading train whenever it shows up.
    Don't forget about lowercase and uppercase eszett! 🤓
    I have the feeling that an original take on two-storey /g/ would work well here...
  • jeremy tribby
    jeremy tribby Posts: 272
    /A looking less narrow to me in context, maybe it’s that the cross bar feels a hair low?
    do you have a target size in mind? I think a lower x height could look nice here

Categories