*Sigh.*

Here is a link for the damn attachment.

This is absolutely brilliant.
I hesitate to criticise the two things I'm not sure about, because they're fine as they are and obviously part of your concept. Have you considered taking the triangular serifs on a, u, m, n and r half way towards slabs, and introducing a white wedge into the top of r, which is too much like the top of p for text comfort?

I really like this, I hope you find the time to complete it soon. How many weights are you working on, are you going for the full family?

Wow, it looks like a text font from the 22nd century.
I'm serious - it's like a vision.

hhp

(just from a fontusers view...)
This looks stunning! Sharp, full of character, rough (meant positive).
Caps and numbers are not developed until now?

regards

Great. This is a good answer to the question "why would we need new typefaces?"

Got stuck in the 'y', bottom part of the 's', top part od the 'r'.

I will add my compliments to the heap, and then get down to what I see.
•The tail of the y is a bit lo-fi. I have this issue with Joanna too. I don't think any harm would be done by narrowing it at the baseline to the same thickness as the other hairline, and letting it flare out to the thickness it's already at on the descender line. (Perhaps let it flare just a bit less than that, so it doesn't look too handsome.)
•On the b, I might raise by just a little the point where the top of the bowl meets the stem (make it flatter).
•The quotation marks are totally out of character. Give them a point. Harmonize them with your lowercase finials.
•I see nothing wrong with the bottom part of the s.
•While as a standalone the r looks pretty lousy, when I read it I didn't get stuck at it. This may be just me. I'm not sure if a more "normal" r would diverge from the font. But you never know until you try: invent one you think would harmonize, and then test it out side-by-side with the current. I'll think about this r and other possible forms.
•The t seems lifeless. A sort of t I've been using a lot in my sketches of fonts is the kind in (for lack of a better font that comes to mind) Slimbach, only with a right, not isosceles, spur on the top. I think you could make use of this. Also perhaps make it a bit wider. Worked for Galliard.

That's all I've got for now. Bring us the rest of Karbon (tremendous name)--capitals, numerals, italic...
(when you can.)

Thanks people. I was just throwing it out there, to see if it is worth finishing. Apparently so, then. I'll have to add this one to the productionlist.

Stay tuned…

—K

c'mon kris, all your stuff is woth finishing! it's just in what order... >^D

can't wait to see your stuff on the market.

What I love about Kris' typography it's I see it like something it could have happened should I have had the opportunity of seriously designing typefaces for a living.

I mean, when in 1994 I had the basic idea which ended up in the release of Ottomat, it was all about the reversed relationship between vertical and horizontal strokes, in certain letters. In typefaces like Prokyon (is that the name? the one from the Dutch Type Foundry), the thing did not work so correctly applied in a textsetting face.
With Kris' work here (and I see Salamanca shares some of this "building grammar"), the thing has a degree of consistency previously undreamed of.

I agree. It looks like something from the (early) 22nd centuty. While, maybe, Ottomat looked like a dream induced by peyote of the 1930s of an alternate reality.
Anyway, if Kris likes my opinion, this is more worth pursuing than Salamanca, to reply Paul's question on the approaching works order.

Kris, I have come upon this due to a more recent thread and have to add a resounding "hell yes." Love it.