Hey people,
It's been a while, but here's Sensato Black. As always, ALL feedback is much appreciated. Enjoy!


Just after a quick glance i feel that the downstroke of A is too heavy. The A itself could also be a bit wider. Maybe Z could be wider, too. The N looks a bit out of balance? The difference between the two counters is maybe too big. Y is too heavy on the left stroke, and the right stroke of V is too thin. Compared to M and N the tapering on the baseline of V and W is stronger. S and s lack dynamic standing inbetween other characters, for my taste (see daws, e. g.).
Go on, great work!
"Angled to the left", sorry. :o Or, actually, more specifically, rotated to the left - to a certain extent it feels as though the whole glyph has simply been rotated a few degrees anticlockwise.
Take the /A/. The slight taper on the left leg - and the lack of any other horizontal lines, and the angled right leg stroke ending - creates an optical illusion that the stroke ending of the left leg that rests on the baseline is actually angled slightly. My eye reads the axis of the letter as being the bisector of the angle formed by these two lines, as if both were angled equally in relation to the main axis. This bisector leans one or two degrees left. Extremely crude illustration of what I mean:

Lowercase vertical stems, particularly those that ascend or descend, look a touch too dark to me. I would narrow them ever so slightly.
Is /y/ too narrow?
/A/ could be wider at the top. /K/'s arm looks a touch weak. /S/ may be very slightly too light.
Any more narrowing of /W/M/ and maybe /w/m/ you can manage would be helpful.
Hi again Jasper :)
There are a couple of things that strike me, but take with plenty of salt of course:
G: perhaps the stem is too light?
K: Something bugs me about it, perhaps it's what Craig just said about the top arm. Or maybe I'd bring the connection a tiny bit closer to the stem.
M and W: agree with Craig.
Diagonals (UC and lc) are rather lively with all their terminals. How do they work in text?
p and q look to have descenders longer than the ascenders of b and d.
I was also going to comment about the A and a, but someone else mentioned those and it looks better now.
X and x: I'd offset the upstroke more, only because of personal preference. Cap VWX seem to me to be falling right, but that could be my eyesight!
I'd love to see a pdf with the regular and black alphabets (UC and lc) compared. If you don't want to post a pdf here, I'd be happy to receive it by e-mail, if you'd like further observations.
This is going to be a very interesting and attractive family.
@Craig: Noted and being worked on :-) I can't manage any more narrowing in /W/M/w/m/ without making them look too dark. Sorry ;-P
@Ben: The stem in G is indeed too light. The problem is that the inner shape and width of the G has to stay balanced. I'll work on it...
Regarding the long descenders, you might want to check out this: http://www.typophile.com/node/85601
VWXx look fine to me...
I'll upload a pdf with the next update :-)
Thanks guys!
Captured from web.archive.org on 14 Apr 2015. view this capture