I use "macro" in crits simply to mean global stuff that applies
to a face as a whole, as opposed to "micro" which is generally
for individual glyphs.

I think the tail of the "J" should be stronger than anything up top.
Still love that "Q"! :-)

I don't like the top of the bowl of the "a" - somewhow it seems undecided whether it's going straight or curling up slightly. I think the "f" could be less shy. The dots of "i" and "j" are out of character; try make them a square but with the top edge at an angle (the same angle as the stem shears). The top of the eszet is too square. The angles on your grave and acute are very shallow - why?

The numeral "4" seems a bit wide. And I think if you put that terminal on the seven, you should think about doing the same to the "2" and/or "5".

Lastly: the vertical proportions, combined with the overall spacing* make me think that this needs to be slightly darker. Don't let my tough-in-spots crit discourage you though - when completed I think this face has a fighting chance to gain some recognition.

* Your blank space is a bit too wide though.

hhp

This looks really good!

Some micro crits :-)
1. The 8 is slightly too dark. 2 is slightly too light.
2. The s is a little too wide.
3. l (lowercase L) has slightly too might space on the right sidebearing (this is the tradeoff of a design with a tail). Especially next to combinations where it should be kerned (lt, lw)
4. y is too dark in the crotch (the joint). I know this is a trademark letter, but I think it needs modification if this is to work in text. Perhaps a more traditional version of text? Y doesn't happen often in german :-) Not so in english.
5. c also a little too wide.
6. I don't like the comma/quotes. They are not long enough and too chunky. Too much like fat fake quotes!

And macro crit:
I agree with that the overall spacing is not right. Optimize the spacing for 9-12 point. I also think the word space is too big. I disagree that you need to make it darker*. Just track the sidebarings out a little bit and close up the word space.

*You might even make it lighter. This will help with interpolation later.

Good stuff!
R

Dear Hanno Bennert,

I see it is wider than the version 1., and it has a better x-height.
Some curves are stiff, the bottom part of ‘S’, and the ‘5’, as for the
five I prefer the previous version vith the oblique stroke.
Agree on consistency as it has been pointed.
The ‘B’ is too wide for me now, I’d go back to version 1. for it.
Is the ‘T’ little bit out of the cap height ?
‘4’ is too wide now, and I’d I’d go back to version 1. for the figure one.
Agree on consistency as it has been pointed.
As for the ‘y’, I think the negative v-space is too much, so you might
improve your design by pulling up the all the control points in the joint.
I also disagree that you need to make it darker but you need to bold a tad
up the cedilla and probably the agonek. Assuming the ‘dieresis’ as correct
vertical position you have to line all the accetns to those dots but the ring.
The Euro sign is wrong, the right end of the bars does not have to be parallel.

Keep up the good work.
Regards,
AS