Well, what do you think?
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| sample.gif | 1.7 KB |
| extras.gif | 1.25 KB |
| two.gif | 5.1 KB |
| File | 3.79 KB |
Well, what do you think?
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| sample.gif | 1.7 KB |
| extras.gif | 1.25 KB |
| two.gif | 5.1 KB |
| File | 3.79 KB |
Your -2- is wonderful. That ampersand is absolute narcissism ... and I love it! The -W- is falling backwards. So is the -s-. So is the -5-, but I think it is because you need to extend the bottom exit stroke by one pixel. The -A- seems a hair too tricky. The -f- seems too short.
Can you show us another setting of the entire set spaced out a bit more?
Miss Tiffany,
Please take a look at two.gif. You were absolutely right about the swashy 'W'; it's much better now. As for the 's', the alternatives aren't any better, are they? And is that what you had in mind for the '5'? Because I don't think it works. So doesn't the longer 'f'. Now, what do you mean by The -A- seems a hair too tricky? As for the spacing, it's either that loose or dense as it was before; I'm not sure which one is preferable. What do you say?
Many thanks,
Ori
Captured from commoncrawl.org on 26 Apr 2015. original URL