New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Yoshiko
Posted by Number3Pencils in
13 May 2006 — 8:01pm
13 May 2006 — 8:01pm
Good evening!
This font is based from memory off of a poster that my grandparents in West Virginia have; I haven't actually seen the poster for a few years because each time I'm there I forget to look at it. It's some interesting geometric art, including the text
yoshiko
mcgaw editions
in this lettering. (It also has an alternate, much thinner c and s that I will make soon.) I discovered that "McGaw Editions" is a company that makes posters, but when I emailed them to ask if they could tell me about that particular one, they couldn't find it in their database. (I assume it's just old, and predates their digital age.) I think it was probably hand-drawn because (1) it's old and (2) I haven't been able to find anything similar, except for one that was similar but not it (I can't find it again or remember its name). Anyways, tell me what you think.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| yoshiko1.pdf | 17.24 KB |
User login
Support our Sponsors
13 May 2006 — 8:34pm
Very nice!
I like the lower case g, it has a nice compactness to it.
The contrast between the thin characters and the wider ones is huge, it adds a lot of character.
Not very easily read, but cool none the less.
13 May 2006 — 8:38pm
I love these geometric faces of old. I wish they made they that one!!!
Mikey
13 May 2006 — 8:43pm
Frankly I'm not sure why, but I think this has potential.
Something about the... terminals maybe, is making it special.
f: no good.
i/j: make dots round? In any case, align tops of dots with ascenders.
r: beak needs help.
s: some people will tell you to make the stroke weight distribution conventional; I suggest you smile and ignore them. But do make the bottom-right curve smoother.
p/q: it might actually make sense to make their descenders shorter than the others. Maybe the "j"'s too (although maybe not as short).
t: weak.
v: good idea, but a bit too full.
A: a bit TOO wide.
I: consider serifs.
J: flatten terminal shear.
L/T: too narrow.
Q: come on, live a little! :-)
S/V: same as in lc.
Y: unsure; maybe try using your "v" structure.
numerals: rationalist. niiice. The "one" is bril.
Pilcrow: dump the little bar in the middle of the stems. And you need more heft, somewhere - that's how a pilcrow works.
%: the bar is cool, but flatten it.
&: thmooooz.
#: I can dig it.
[/]: longer bars, probably.
(/): wishful thinking - too much like square brackets.
guillemets: make more angular.
cedilla: out of character.
accents: the ring is bril, the diaeresis is OK, the rest are out of character.
$: nice.
Yen: I'd use one bar; if not, lower them.
BP: not working. Try a smaller top.
eszet: squashed head. Let it be what it needs to be.
Spacing: too tight; the stem-stems are bunching.
hhp
14 May 2006 — 12:58am
hrant> I love your thoroughness!
18 May 2006 — 10:04am
my personal feelings:
the spacing is toooooooooooo tight. it could be loosened, if even just a tad.
the ascenders are toooooooooooo short. even a slight bit of adjustment would help readability. i kept reading the d as an a.
18 May 2006 — 11:14am
too loose and it will lose its charm. this could never be a text-face or even a subhead-face, but as a display-face it has some retro promise.
1 Jun 2006 — 2:21pm
I think Paul is right about the ascenders. Tiffany is quite right, too, but a little more unevenness would make it more lively. Hrant is right about the numerals as well: their style is a counterpoint to most of the letters' one.
My idea: heighten the ascenders a little, differentiate a bit some forms to get rid of an excessive homogeneous quality. Don't know how to do it without loosing the general feeling, anyway.