New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
FontClaire
FontClaire started with a sketch of the lower case g and turned into a student BFA project. It's still incomplete, lacking numerals and full punctuation, but I'm very happy with it's progress, so far--even though I haven't touched it in years.
I really like the upper case, but still feel like the lower case needs more unity. Any thoughts?
//joe
User login
Support our Sponsors
5 Jun 2001 — 11:14am
very very cool. an interesting combination of the geometric and organic. I'm debating with myself about the uc S. It is a little wider than the other letters, and makes the texture a bit uneven. However, I think the imperfection adds to the character of the face. I would definitely loose the taper on the top end, though. I'm with simon on the lc. i really like. I would loose the kink on the upper arm of the k (it works on the uc)-- it feels like it could be simplified. The x's kind of bug me. it seems the curved geometry is justified on the other letters, but feels forced on the x.
are you planning on publishing it any time soon?
cr
5 Jun 2001 — 11:26am
Good comments and thanks.
Simon, I wonder if you could be more specific about the UC...
Christian, you mention the x. I've always had second thoughts about it. I've also considered making the UC A with an apex, rather than a rounded top. I could see that working well with elements from the v and a more standard x, like you suggest.
And, yes, you've found my biggest personal weakness, that S. Heh.
5 Jun 2001 — 5:18pm
Flingford,
I think the UC V, the diagonal strokes are more visual strong than all set.
Great work!!
Regards
11 Jun 2001 — 7:14pm
Here's a better sample of the lowercase for your reference. My biggest question is how the upper relates to the lower case (the cap-height, mostly).
Also, how is the rhythm of the UC versus the rhythm of the lc? Do these relate well? I feel like it needs some work, but am unsure about the next steps...
16 Jun 2001 — 6:27pm
As for the x; maybe go with a straight upper left to lower right stroke, and keep the other one curved. Type historians will love it.
9 Nov 2001 — 12:07pm
i think it's great. have you ever heard of graham meade? i love the beizer curves and the taper ends.
as for the UC an lc, i think they play off each other well. other than any cleaning up ( that you might
want to do) it looks perfect. many congrats!!!!! hope to see this one working soon.
1 Apr 2002 — 11:03am
--
Also, how is the rhythm of the UC versus the rhythm of the lc? Do these relate well?
--
i think the UC forms could be slightly stunted to remove some of the disruption their verticality lends. try dropping them _slightly_ below the hight of the lc acenders.
and i would second the comment about the lc w, it seems to grab too much attention
9 May 2002 — 7:32pm
I think the two things that jump out at me are the lc "l" and the UC "J." They both feel very top heavy to me. I would suggest just lowering them slightly below the baseline. The problem seems similiar to the way round letters tend to feel like thery float when the just touch the baseline and dont penetrate it.
9 May 2002 — 7:34pm
Did I say UC "J?" I must be drunk. I meant "Y." How embarassing.
5 Jun 2001 — 8:15am
I would disagree. I think you
13 Jul 2001 — 11:21am
Joe. I said it once and I'll said it again. Beautiful. I agree with Christian. The 'S' seems to be falling backwards. Maybe tapering the bottom and ending it a bit sooner would resolve the top issue. Have you set a whole page? Our language isn't hampered with the usage of too many capital letters (in body set type) so perhaps your concern with the lower and the upper isn't of such great import? How about your little trick on the 'k'? Perhaps incorporating that trick somehow in the 'x'? Because of the narrowness of the letters you might tighten up the over all word spacing as well. The 'r' seems to want a little more curve into the stem?
Beautiful.
14 Aug 2001 — 3:37am
Feedback from a total amateur: the LC 'w' seems a tad wide. Anyone agree? Otherwise, lovely!