not the first i know - interested to get some feedback on it anyway
thanks in advance :)
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| c prelim.PNG | 35.85 KB |
| CLARINETS.PNG | 10.32 KB |
| SAVINGS.PNG | 10.27 KB |
not the first i know - interested to get some feedback on it anyway
thanks in advance :)
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| c prelim.PNG | 35.85 KB |
| CLARINETS.PNG | 10.32 KB |
| SAVINGS.PNG | 10.27 KB |
For the G, I was thinking something more like this:
http://new.myfonts.com/fonts/presencetypo/tschichold/
Also: the O could use some overshoot, and the J is a little light.
The X and Y seem a bit light, and I don't know if that's just my eyes, but it almost looks like the bottom-left to top-right leg of the X doesn't cross the other leg in one straight line. It also looks, visually to me at least, like the top of the C overhangs the bottom. And the O is still looking a bit heavy to me.
Too many cooks . . . the first version you showed was on the right track. The proportions were strange but that's what was cool about it. Keep whittling it down and you'll end up with a Gotham clone. Pointers are pointers but don't let a bunch of people design it for you or it'll lose all its personality. I've watched a lot of fonts get spoiled or amlost spoiled by committee on Typophile. Everyone here has their own idea of what looks good but if you average it all together it's just a gray mass.
Don't let beziers design your S for you or you'll end up with a generic S. Try making a an S only using straight lines. Spend an hour moving those points around and testing in words. When you're comfortable with it, then works on beziers on another layer. About half the time I spend on an alphabet is on the S and X . . . tough letters.
Captured from web.archive.org on 15 Apr 2015. view this capture