Luca Titling

kris's picture

Here is Luca Titling, a bifurcated serif face that has been
kicking around on my hard drive for a while. There will
eventually be a complete Luca family soon, with a matching
sans and inline/fancy. All comments are appreciated.

kris.



application/pdf
luca_post_01.pdf (18.5 k)

kris's picture

Goodness. Not one comment! It must be bad ;-)

kris

mike gastin's picture

Kris, I love it. I am not a type designer, so I can not really offer much in the way of technical criticism. But, I can tell you that I like it. The face is pleasing and seems to have nice ballance.

Nice work!

kakaze's picture

How is it considered bifurcated? I thought that meant split in two?

I like it though. But I have to say that the bottom of the "head" (can't remember what it's called) of the R should be thicker. Also, what about moving the tail under the baseline? It sticks out so far that it creates an awkward space between the letter next to it.

And the E looks very thin, should be wider I think.

The C looks small.


Really good start.

rs_donsata's picture

It makes me think of flowers and sun

designalchemy's picture

very nice especially the S and R.
Reminds me of Hoeflers work.

kris's picture

>>How is it considered bifurcated? I thought that meant split in two?

I meant the serifs are bifurcated, not the stems. I think it is correct terminology. I am more than willing to stand corrected, though.

kris

kakaze's picture

bi

aquatoad's picture

I think those are called cupped serifs.

The style is nice. The trouble I see is a color issue. It has to do with your thins. Take a look at the BETW combination. The B has some of the thinnest thins in the whole face. Compare it to the BE. The W is even more thick than them. True they won't be exactly the same, but they should *look* the same. I'd shoot for a uniform thin slightly less than the arms of the E.

Oh here's a tip on E's. The arms shouldn't be of equal thickness or they will look unequal. I start with them equal, then add a hair to the bottom (heft is needed at the bottom), and shave a bit off the middle. Again the key is making them *look* the same. (top of T = bottom of E)

While I'm at it, here are some common construction issues with caps:
F: Equals the E with the middle arm moved down slightly (sometimes extended), and the bottom right serif extended (how much is up to you)
L: Equals the E with the bottom arm shortened.
P: Bowl equals the top of the R dropped down a bit (or the R is raised up a bit.
X: Watch out for this problem. (scroll down)

Keep an eye on the curves on the S. They're wobbly through the spine.
I'd try a different leg on the R. With those fancy pants serifs it want's something more than a straight crutch. (also raise up the waist

kakaze's picture

Bah, I can't edit my post... not a "y shame", a "y shape"! heh.

And cupped serif does sound better.

kris's picture

>>With those fancy pants serifs...

That's pretty much it, isn't it! It's just a bloody fancy, almost pretentious typeface. It is amazing what a few grouped beziers can say...

>>And cupped serif does sound better.

Do you think? I reckon "bifurcated" sounds fancier, "cupped" sounds more friendly, and reminds me of bra's. Thanks for the feedback, I realised that it is quite rough at this stage. It is a digitisation of a speciman I found in an old type journal. I am pretty much using it to have a play and familiarise myself with the older titling proportions.

kris.

Syndicate content Syndicate content