New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Italic of Lineare Serif [Argentina]
First aproach for lowercases.
 lineare_serifitalic_1.pdf (14.8 k) |
User login
Support our Sponsors
First aproach for lowercases.
lineare_serifitalic_1.pdf (14.8 k) |
16 Sep 2003 — 1:34pm
Sample with lineare serif roman.
lineare_serifitalic_2.pdf (20.5 k)
16 Sep 2003 — 1:34pm
Sample with lineare serif roman.
16 Sep 2003 — 1:43pm
It looks nice, but I think it's too cursive.
Some quick comments:
- s is wide and dark, and needs more slant;
- keep the k's leg aligned to the baseline;
- m is narrow;
- make a double-storey g;
- abdpq are too light comparing to hmn.
16 Sep 2003 — 4:01pm
Oh, I really like that. It flows quite nicely.
17 Sep 2003 — 10:50am
This is marvelous! Roman and italic.
Things to look at in the italic:
- The "s" The pen angle is too flat.
- Look for consistency in your modulation. ie the s, e, c -vs- p, m, n. (I'd say thin down the s, e, c etc)
- You're poothooks/serifs, could use a bit of thinning.
I guess that's the main thing apart from your s. Pick a thin extreme and stick with it! Great stuff.
Randy
17 Sep 2003 — 11:04am
This is really nice! It dances on the page, but it's a great stylistic match to the roman. The two glyphs that don't seem to work are the "g" and "s".
But there's a problem: in a body of roman it's not standing out enough. You can either increase the slant (although I personally like gentle slants), or make it lighter (slightly), or narrower (first choice), or give it a slightly smaller x-height - or of course a combination of those.
Keep it up!
hhp
18 Sep 2003 — 2:26pm
News signs in red.
lineare_serifitalic_3.pdf (21.4 k)
18 Sep 2003 — 2:26pm
News signs in red.
18 Sep 2003 — 2:50pm
The "s" is almost there... Maybe put some shears on its terminals?
The spine of the "z" is uncharacteristically stiff.
hhp
18 Sep 2003 — 5:15pm
my wholly unprofessional reaction: ooooo, I like the italic "d." (:
19 Sep 2003 — 12:38pm
Eduardo.
I still think the stroke contrast is inconsistant. Your serifs (cant remember if that's what they're called in this case) seem thick. compared to where your banches join (n,m etc) also, on the s, looking better, but still make the thins thin! It's making the color spotty. Sparkle yes. Spotty, no.
Good Luck -- Randy
21 Sep 2003 — 12:23pm
The bowl of the g might look better if it went below the baseline- already evident in the q. In text, next to the r, looks a bit small...
25 Sep 2003 — 2:31pm
Some changes in lc and first UC.
Thanks for all, Eduardo
lineare_serifitalic_4.pdf (26.7 k)
25 Sep 2003 — 2:31pm
Some changes in lc and first UC.
Thanks for all, Eduardo
25 Sep 2003 — 3:04pm
I like the new [red] "g".
The "s" needs to become much more... delicate.
Wassup with your ascender height variability?
hhp
25 Sep 2003 — 4:47pm
Hi Eduardo.
Nice improvements! The color looks more even when printed than it does on screen. I have that same problem. Hinting novice.
Hope you don't mind but I took the liberty of doing a quick suggestion for your s in photoshop. In my opinion, you need to take the weight out of the curves and put it into the spine. It matches the other characters in the italic better. In the roman it's ok to have less weight in the spine, more in the curves. Here it looks clunky. Again very quickly done in photoshop.
This looks really nice!
I'd say you are pretty close.
Cheers,
Randy
16 Sep 2003 — 12:52pm
Nice!!!!! Eduardo. Can you show us a sample of the roman with this? Just for comparison?