Hi Eric,

Beautiful and ambitious! I like it. The style seems consistent and
for the most part well done. I'm also a large admirer of Doyald
Young's work. A few comments:

1. Overall I think the general swash shapes are working,
Consider adding a second swash element that begins in the loop
below the D, parallels the other, the crosses to curl into the
white space below the ld to improve balance. Make sense?

2. The D. I'm not fond of the top curling in and the bowl curving
in also. Consider trying the bowl crossing over the stem and
connecting to the stems tail (echoing the y).

3. The y is too narrow and poorly spaced between the o and a.
(tough to kern a pencil drawing -- exacto!). Not sure the ball
terminal fits. Nice detail in the slight bulge on the right side.

4. The modulation in the l is uncertain. Actually, the modulation
in general is a little inconsistent, but not incredibly so. It's the
danger of drawing a script with a pencil. You have to know
exactly how you'd draw it with a pen or brush. I know Young
uses a pencil for his scripts, as did Benguiat when he drew
Edwardian Script. I don't have this expertise, but something
seems off. Try to picture the draw of the nib as you apply
pressure down and release going up, and the angle that your
wrist can feasibly make, will it take one or two strokes etc... Did
you have a model you were working from? Kinda sounded like
you chose not to. Even if it's not close look at something to sure
up your modulation.

5. Maybe wrap the top of the d a little more to echo the swash tail.

There are some flat curves in here, but that can be remidied.
This kind of thing is really tough. I'm impressed. I notice you are
in LA, is this a class for Doyald? Looking forward to seeing the final.

Randy

Breathtaking.. Beautiful.. It is..

I may second Randy, about maybe adding a second swash, for balance and fine detailing..
Impressing.. I am also anxious about to the further progression and final..

thanks for the feedback

here's my next try, taking into account your comments.



Still some issues, but on the right track? I definitely agree that the "y" was too narrow, and as much as I liked the teardrop terminal, that was one thing identified in class as not being quite consistent with the other characters.

hence, I've tried to widen the y and I've added a spiky swash terminal. The left arm of the y still feels a little heavy, and something about its conection to the o isn't quite right.

I've tried to pay attention to modulation, and the thick/thin contrast. The area where the "a" connects to the "l" feels light now...

I'd love more suggestion on how to keep improving my piece. The final is due tuesday, but I will keep refining it beyond that point.

the class is not for doyald young, but I'm supposed to meet him this month sometime, and I'd like to show him this piece, so I need it to be bulletproof...

thanks for the feedback

here's my next try, taking into account your comments.



Still some issues, but on the right track? I definitely agree that the "y" was too narrow, and as much as I liked the teardrop terminal, that was one thing identified in class as not being quite consistent with the other characters.

hence, I've tried to widen the y and I've added a spiky swash terminal. The left arm of the y still feels a little heavy, and something about its conection to the o isn't quite right.

I've tried to pay attention to modulation, and the thick/thin contrast. The area where the "a" connects to the "l" feels light now...

I'd love more suggestion on how to keep improving my piece. The final is due tuesday, but I will keep refining it beyond that point.

the class is not for doyald young, but I'm supposed to meet him this month sometime, and I'd like to show him this piece, so I need it to be bulletproof...

I liked the modulation in the original one much better. This new one is too... English - if you know what I mean.

Also, the cap "D" is a bit unclear. Try making the "stem" curl left at the top instead of right.

BTW, do you look like Almod

That's a huge improvement. And it was excellent to start with.

So here are my two bits:

The first D is sloped too far. It looks to me like it's being forced out of the way by the y's swashing tail. Which isn't very nice. It also very closely resembles an infinite symbol. Try straightening the stem a bit and raising the intersection point.

Also, I have to point out just how phallic the D in your first effort is. You might want to save that for a more provocative typeface. Perhaps titled "ID" or "Freudian Thoughts."

The bottom of the bowel of the second "d" begins to thicken too soon and too fast compared to the "a."

Maybe thicken the second arm of the "y."

Gorgeous script.

One more suggestion: Try wrapping the top of the "D" around instead of flaring out the bottom.

I think it would increase legibility and balance the lines by matching the "y" swash on the right side. Kind of like a pair of parentheses or a frame.

I overemphasized the thins a little on purpose...I think it needs to be somewhere in between, maybe

dewitt, I changed the slope at the bottom of the first d's bowl, which does make it seem to lean forward more. good call.

is the additional swash on the second one working? I had something like it in an earlier verion, but took it out. looking at both I think maybe the simpleness is better?

I'll revise and post my next version in a little bit

I overemphasized the thins a little on purpose...I think it needs to be somewhere in between, maybe

dewitt, I changed the slope at the bottom of the first d's bowl, which does make it seem to lean forward more. good call.

is the additional swash on the second one working? I had something like it in an earlier verion, but took it out. looking at both I think maybe the simpleness is better?

I'll revise and post my next version in a little bit

Eric, this is beautiful. Very nice. When can I buy it? :-)

Sharon

Personally, I prefer the second floating swash (if anyone knows a name more proper, please inform my ignorance of it).

I was just wondering if you couldn't use the shape of the D from the first picture to drop down into that swash.

However, the first picture does have more focus on the word itself. The second one has such a repetition of that curved right line that it motivates your eyes into its direction. It reminds me of sound waves.

If you don't like the effect, try cutting the fat out of the bottom. Those swashes are much thicker than the top letterforms.

Also, the back of the "a" should technically be thicker. I believe it would fall on the wider angle of the pen, and follow through slightly into the ligature between the "l." I could be mistaken, though.

Either way, I still prefer the extra swash. And I like the extreme thick thin difference.

third attempt.



tried something new with the D, but doesn't seem to be working that well. I think I'm losing focus...

I'm taking a break and starting work again tomorrow

thanks for all the comments so far, really helpful

dewitt

here's an earlier, rough sketch that incorporates what you're talking about

Concerning the one in your 8:31 post:
- The "D" is certainly more "natural" now, to me at least.
- I think emphasizing the loop in the "a" is pushing it towards an "o" too much.
- The tail of the "y" is coming out neither from the left arm nor the right, which I'm finding discordant.
- I would move the lefthand swell in the tail of the "y" a lot more counterclockwise.

hhp

Hi Eric,

As a matter of personal taste I actually prefer the original post. It's unusual to see a low(er) contrast, formal script.

Looking at formal scripts that include swashes and flourishes, is seems the lower case in particular is pretty locked in it's modulation axis. The caps have a bit more variation as needed, and the flourishes often vary considerably.

For example in your 11/7 2:59 post, the flourishes seem to follow the axis of the roman too much yielding too much up and down motion. The original brings more horizontal push which is nice. Also in this example, the one-sided a and one-sided l look week in combination.

Basically, I'd go back to your original drawing, and focus on:
1. Getting the D to feel comfortable.
2. The y wider, as in later versions, but make sure the right is thin (!) swelling smoothly, but quickly at the end to finish (more like the teardrop, just finishing in a point) -- I'd keep it at x-height too).
3. Working on the l. Understanding that the orignal style is quite different that what I'm about to point too, I still think this form could work (Hogarth). Note how it doesn't actually connect as yours does, it begins higher.

One other note, I think generally, the thicks in your flourishes should be slightly thinner than the thicks in the text. Put the emphasis on the word. See Bickham for example.

Oh, and I agree that the second flourish is a little busy. Keep pushing! I applaud you for sticking to a pencil and your brain. It lets an idea remain an idea and not straight jacket you into a bad idea because it looks "final."

R

Eric

The D in the 8:31 post looks much more dignified now.

Hrant is right about the 'a' and 'o' becoming too similar. However, I think flattening (or cutting diagonal) the top of the a's stem while bringing the point slightly closer would fix it. I'm looking at your first drawing which doesn't seem to have the problem.

I'm not sure why Randy doesn't like the 'y' going above x-height. It increases the y's character, in my opinion. I'd even suggest raising the left side too. But you do need to carry a thicker stroke out of the arm of the 'y' so the left side arm runs into the right side.

I like Randy's suggestion for the 'l.' It does look more standard than the other letters.

As for the 8:42 post: the D is so much more original to me. I was thinking that besides straightening the stem, the first D would do better to not have the top wrap in on itself. I know everything else is more round, but it becomes much more recognizable if the top of the D goes back straighter, with only a slight curve.

The D is definitely worth another try or two.

My preference is still for the second flourish and the 8:42 post is intriguing to me. That post is also a good reminder of why kerning is so important with scripts. It reminds me of the Walg reens I have to pass everyday on my route to work. But that's for the Critique Board.

Well, we're coming at you from all angles here. I'd be more willing to give up the second flourish if the original D, with changes, slipped back into the picture. To my eyes, with the work you're basing this off of, the thins increase Doyald's elegance.

thanks for all the comments from everyone. even though I'm not sure I agree with everything (nor do the different opinions agree with each other), it has given me a lot to think about and try. I'm going to try at least one more version before my class today at 5:30. I'll try to do 2 if I can.

I really like the simplicity of just one flourish beneath the word; I've tried adding a second one two seperate times, and I wasn't happy with it, so I'm going to stick to one. Also, I think I prefer the original D, or some modification of it. Since I'm not truly designing a font here (more of a logo, I guess) I think I can take certain liberties with the characters.

I should have another version in an hour or 2

eric

here's version #4



I think this is the direction I want to move in; I preferred the original D, with 2 seperate strokes, and I like having more of a flourish to it. I think it balances out the flourish on the other side, which extends past the lc "d"

I think the y is improved; the angle is more consistent with the other letters and the right arm transitions better into the flourish.

The a is pretty good, looks much more like an a than an o, and the weight on the right side is more consistent with the d.

Not sure about the l. I tried to straighten the left stroke and bulge out the right one. I liked that about the Hobart l. I think the bulge on the right size echoes the ascender of the d as well. I still wanted the l to connect to the a, though.

The D could probably still use some finessing. Overall, though I think this version is close to what I am going for.

whew...time to go to class. keep comments coming, though because I plan to keep working on it.

Eric

I love it. My eyes just float around and around it, like a roller coaster.

I'm glad you stuck with the D. The angle of its stem no longer bothers me and it fits so much better with the rest of the script.

The real problem is that 'l.' The thick side needs to curve more. It's too straight compared to the 'd' and the flourishes.

That is a simple solution.

I'd also like to suggest to you a more drastic change with the 'l.' The first example I found was Roundhand by Mr. Snell and Mr. Carter.

Of course, that's not the best example for this script, but if the 'l' became just a simple solid curve, matching the 'd' but slightly flatter, I think it would compliment your script.

I think you're doing a wonderful job of taking suggestions from us while finding solutions of your own.

DeWitt

Lookin' good.

- The main thing left for me is the "D" bordering on a "P". Since "Doyald" is a rare name it's more of a problem than it might seem.
- I think the "el" is too upright/rigid.
- Hey, what about making the exit stroke of the "el" flow into the top-right of the bowl of the "d"?

hhp

nice work so far ... I like the overall balance ... and I like
the arm echo on the 'y' and the 'd' ...
agreed on the 'D' ... left as-is, it might be read as 'Poyald' ...
I think the lowercase 'd' is a bit heavy on the bottom right ...
and the rightmost swash _ how would it look as a hairline only?

bj

<font class="dontLookLikeCrap">FYI
Doyald Young is visiting New York City and lecturing THURSDAY, nov. 11

Just thought this might be a more appropriate place to post this info.

http://www.aigany.org/events/details/?event=05DY


Aaron</font>

hey all,

I've been a bit busy with other stuff, so it's taken awhile to post my revisions.

I've moved to the computer, since I feel I've gotten far enough.



this version is bothering me; I feel like there are things wrong, but I'm not exactly sure what they are. it feels like some of the slopes and strokes aren't conistent, some of the curves aren't quite right. It's a little frustrating...

I'd appreciate comments on tightening this up. also any advice in general on bringing drawings into illustrator and keeping the consistency?

thanks,

eric

Eric,

The left side of the 'a' is too thick.

The left side of the 'd' is too thick and the right side is too thin. Notice the where the 'l' (very nice) begins to fatten up, that's more of how the 'd' should go. The 'a's backside does this excellently.

The flourish is once again thicker then the 'd' which also causes problems.

The 'D' looks even better, except the slope of the stem is a little too far right.

Now that I look at it, the left side of the 'o' is also a little too fat and the right side could curve a bit more.

Keep tweaking; it's getting there stone by stone.

well, I think this is the best I can do at this point...



it still has problems, but I feel like my returns are diminishing. what I really need is more experience...I think it's time to move to the next project and keep learning

thanks for all the feedback I received. I really appreciate the constructive criticism and encouragement.

I think it's bothering you because it's dynamic, not a formal script. You might actually try the "if you love it set it free" approach, where you relish its human complexity instead of trying to make it "perfect".

hhp

I think that the way the two arms of the y connect to form the tail in your vector drawing is a bit uncomfortable, but I can't give any good advice about how to fix it.

This is really beautiful.

I have to second the comment that was made about the stroke contrast in the later versions vs. the first version. I really like those strokes better, because of the less contrast. That isn't as common, and I find it very interesting to look at. I can't ponder your newer ones as much, but as I said, they are still stunning. Best of luck finishing this, I hope that you'll love it as much as we do!

So who's gonna stop this moronity.

hhp