Type Critique
- Started
- Last post
- 16 Responses
- Nairn0
Why's the leg on the L so deep?
- I noticed that also, have another version where it only goes in "1px"whereiputstuff
- VectorMasked0
Looks like a third of the character wouldn't even be legible at 16pts.
- It's seems too "bannery" ever to be that small.waterhouse
- And that's a good thing.waterhouse
- whereiputstuff0
Good point, hadn't thought much about its use, if any, at smaller point sizes.
- coco_ono0
i feel like it could be fatter - i like dem fatty letters, fo sho.
- d_rek0
I like it... i think the you could tighten the letterspacing and kern some of the pairs tighter. And i don't know if it's just me but just because they're monowidth letterforms doesn't mean they need to be monospaced...
- whereiputstuff0
Thanks
- letterhead0
Thin it up, add some curves, turn it into a humanist sans?
- don't listen to meletterhead
- That sounds like a whole nother project, hahawhereiputstuff
- cannonball0
I'm spending too much time being able to read it. You're not making me work enough for it.
- VectorMasked0
I find the "small caps" if we can call them that... and the capital letter D in "Donuts" are struggling to work together.
The height of this character don't go well. Their heights clash.Also, the question mark doesn't blend in well with the overall style/feel/shapes.
kthxbye
- whereiputstuff0
Good catch on the lower case/small caps issue.
- whereiputstuff0
Glad to see you're putting the type to good use. I like it.
- erikjonsson0
looks like novum
- whereiputstuff0
Very similar indeed.
Novum's angles are a lot deeper, which probably makes it much more legible at small sizes as was discussed above.
- monospaced0
I'm kinda sick of this type. There are at least 20 typefaces out there that look nearly identical to this. Which one are you copying?
- None, started with a square and chipped awaywhereiputstuff
- So did the other 20.monospaced
- stewart0
a type isn't a type without a lowercase