My first typeface draft, feedback is very much welcome

An Escherian font is a nice idea, and I really like your curvy terminals.

all characters are the same width except for the m w and i

I can't think of a good reason to do that... Either all the characters should be the same width (AKA monospace font) which can be a useful feature, or let each character be the width it needs.

BTW, call it Maurits.

hhp

Working well: I, K, N, 4 (though the triangular counter is too small), 8
Not working: B, 3
Q would be more legible if the tail went rightward instead.
The grid has served its purpose, now be ready to depart from it where useful.

Thanks for the replies. My initial plan was to have it monospaced but after developing it some letters didnt suit being the same width such as the i. Departing from the grid definately seems like a good idea.

The terminals were originally set as straight 45 degreed lines but I ended up going with the curves to make it a bit different. In the end I would quite like to have the curved and straight options available.

I had considered Maurits as the name. I put down Riley after Bridget Riley but its all still in consideration and open to offers.

Fun idea! Some nice execution, some problems as Craig notes. If you can get more depth illusions into some characters, like the C, it would make it more consistent and stronger.

Thanks, I did seem a bit unsure of referring it to Escher when not all the letters were impossible shapes! I'll see what I can add to the rest of them

"...all characters are the same width except for the m w and i and the numbers are slightly thinner..."

This is perfectly normal for a modular display face.

If I keep it as a modular typeface should I be optically refining it or keeping it strict within its composition?

Visual coherence is much more important than relationship to the grid, in my opinion, but then I've never tried to stick to a grid. If you have the marked depth illusion on all the characters, then those that are impossible will have even more punch, I think. Remember they will be in words, so the conflict between possible and impossible will have its own play. I think having the terminal curves and width more consistent will help a lot. This part needs to be a bit more uniform, I think. Eg the C terminals are different.

If I keep it as a modular typeface should I be optically refining it or keeping it strict within its composition?

Get this into a font editor, set some words, and make your decision based on that.

But David, wouldn't the "G" for example benefit from being allowed to be wider? As long as even just one letter is breaking the monospace mold (thus making the font generally unusable for making everything line up) why not just fugetaboutit?

hhp

Hrant, I think monospace and modular, are two different things.