It looks like some of the widths could be evened out a bit. AEHLST look a bit narrow. Check your stroke widths too — the hairlines on F and K are quite different weights. The descender on J is quite weak. The spine of S could be more smooth and sloped.

Thank you Ben, for your feedback.

I have adressed the widths and altered the spine of the S, added some bulk to the tail of the J and made some changes to the weights of some diagonal strokes.

new pdf

Just to add; the feeling I'm going for is more classic than contemporary.

New PDF is up with the following changes:

• S terminals more like that of C and G
• Lightened the top of the A
• Removed serif from right leg of the R, like on K
• Made the D look less like an I with a belly

Again, any feedback is welcome.

The S and G feel unbalanced to me; the top terminals need to be moved slightly to the left. The top terminal of the C might benefit from a tiny leftward nudge, too. The A feels a bit narrow to me, but maybe others would disagree.

Updated pdf:

• Top terminals on S, C and G moved a bit inwards
• Moved the waist of the S up a bit
• More changes to the D
• New Q (although an improvement, still not sure on this)
• Made the A wider, but fear it has become too light(?)

I like it!

One small comment: the top of the C and G look like they have a flattened region. Compare with the top of the O and Q which look nicely rounded.

Thanks! Yes you're right about the C & G, it may have been caused by the adjustments of the terminals I did, thank you for pointing it out.

Good work. To me the bowl of the R is too big, too similar to the P. It could be a bit smaller, between the B and the P. Also the stem of the U does'nt seems vertical and the curve could be a bit wider. Also, I think the A should be wider. Keep going.

Thanks for the feedback, André. I'll keep working on it.

G needs more refinement The upper serif isn't flowing nicely from the stem
should it be more like the S. But looking better and better