New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Create an account
Typophile RSS | More Feeds
This one has been giving me a lot of trouble--it's *so* close to Walbaum and Walburn, but the "C" is not quite right.
I figured it out....it *is* in fact Walbaum, just a really really really bad redraw, as noted in your first reply. I went back a looked at an original logo versus the eps that was sent to me and lo and behold, Walbaum. It's been squished a little and it has fake small caps, but it's not as bad as that mess.
The case is indeed closed. Thanks for the help.
There's something really weird with this one. It's full of inconsistencies. Note the hairline stems of the 'N' and 'W', they appear to be way too thin in comparison with the 'M'. Both the spine of the 'S' and the tail of the 'R' look cramped. The serifs on the 'C' are much thinner than on the 'S'. The lower left-hand serif of the 'R' is too heavy, and the bracketing of the serifs is all over the place: from fairly rounded on the 'N' to almost straight on the 'M'. And the aforementionned lower left-hand serif of the 'R' even seems to jump upwards at the edges. Could this be... *gasp*... Mary Shelley's typeface of Frankenstein? Arghh... the horror!
Hey Kyle, you're not pulling a 'Tom Cannon' on us I hope? =D
I'm with Yves. Maybe it's Walbum. Where does the sample come from, Kyle? That can really assist with an ID.
Isn't it possible it's a not-so-successful rip-off? Or an amateur design?
Whoops, you cross-posted me there. Case solved, I presume?