New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Anton Regular
Posted by mads in
2 May 2002 — 3:45pm
2 May 2002 — 3:45pm
First of all: what a great initiative! Your comments and work is a great inspiration to me.
This here is my first font. I mainly made it to to get experienced with the software, thus the utter simplicity of it.. it's been lurking around my hard drive for quite some time now, so I think it's about time I finish it 
Any comments as to what I should do better?
Thank you,
Mads Rahbek Hougaard
User login
Support our Sponsors
2 May 2002 — 4:14pm
Hm.. the browser froze when I was about to upload the picture. Hopefully it works this time:
2 May 2002 — 4:59pm
You have some really nice forms, like both "G/g"s, the UC "Q", and the numerals. Plus the caps being x-height is really practical.
hhp
2 May 2002 — 5:05pm
I like it. The mixing of lowercase and uppercase would be a breeze with this typeface
Only thing I would suggest is "humanizing" the typeface a bit. Softening it up a bit...
The K's does seem a bit odd though.
2 May 2002 — 5:39pm
Mmm. I like.
I think the K is nice. Perhaps an alternate is in order.
I think that q could, out of context be mistaken for a g...
3 May 2002 — 1:34am
Nice. I really like your ampersand, comma, 'K', 'k', 'f' and 'm'!
That 'q' is a killer! The 'Q' however seems too much like your 'q'. I'd round off the top like on the 'O'.
Also I think the 'g' is too closed. Maybe open up the lower counter.
6 May 2002 — 2:41pm
Richard Wikstrom:
I thought they were pretty straight-forward..
>Only thing I would suggest is "humanizing" the typeface a bit. Softening it up a bit...
I hear you. It definetly needs "humanizing"!
Still, doing that would probably make it necessary to change a whole lot (if not everything), which I'm not really up to...
The "dead" nature of this font might be because I was very (perhaps too) systematic about it. Building the letters out of small bricks. Next time I'll try a different approach.
>The K's does seem a bit odd though.
Joe Pemberton:
>I think the K is nice. Perhaps an alternate is in order.
Odd? Nice? In what way?
Here's a pic of the old k's - but I don't really like them. I think this K resembles the X too much. Also, I was thinking the new k's would probably be more readable in context with the other letters, because they are more unique? But perhaps they're too unique?
>I think that q could, out of context be mistaken for a g...
I've heard that before, so it's probably true. But I must admit I'm quite fond of it as it is, so I think I'll take my chances
Jonathan Hise Kaldma:
>The 'Q' however seems too much like your 'q'. I'd round off the top like on the 'O'.
Good point. I will try that.
>Also I think the 'g' is too closed. Maybe open up the lower counter.
I was hoping nobody would notice that! I have earlier tried to do something about it, but I thought the results didn't work out that well. I just made two new versions though, which aren't just as bad. Or, one of them isn't. I think. Here they are:
I sort of like the black one. But maybe the space in the middle (excuse my complete lack of english typographic words!) is still too small?
Thank you all (including you Hrant) for the nice words - it went smoother than I expected...
-Mads Rahbek Hougaard
6 May 2002 — 2:51pm
hm.. having a second look on the g's, I'm thinking the old g is still the best of the three. But it's not perfect, I agree..
-Mads.
6 May 2002 — 3:39pm
I think your "k"s are killer, avoiding the problem that Industria has, for example. Don't worry about the "q" too much, as it's almost always followed by a "u", and that enhances its decipherability. And I think a somewhat cramped lc "g" is actually better.
hhp
6 May 2002 — 3:49pm
Ok, nevermind my comment on the K's, they're perfectly OK, much better than the lower option.
6 May 2002 — 7:58pm
Hi Mads, hvad syntes du om dgh?
Sorry typophiles, it is not often I get a chance to speak my native tongue. I am curious what Mads thinks of his school DGH.
8 May 2002 — 10:19pm
very nice. the only comments I'd make are that the most successful parts are the softer elements since the overall structure has a very technical feel to it. The contrast of tech and soft is nice.
lc 'j" seems a bit too squared and industrial
lc "f" is a little top heavy
"v" is a little too squared in my opinion.
Very nice
14 May 2002 — 2:25pm
Thanks for your comments, I'll look into it..
Ole, jeg sender dig lige en email!
Mads.
22 Jul 2002 — 6:17pm
If any of you would like to have this font btw, you can! follow this link: http://www.madshougaard.dk/downloads/mrh_Anton.zip
Have a nice summer,
Mads
22 Jul 2002 — 6:23pm
Congratulations on your release! (And thanks!)
22 Jul 2002 — 7:10pm
Thank you, Mads! This is one of the last fonts
I'd expect to go for free. Very generous.
Your site is really nice too.
Stephen
23 Jul 2002 — 4:05am
Thanks Stephen and Joe!
I should probably have added this before: I haven't made all 256 characters, as well as it merely contains about 85 kerning pairs. Which is why I could never think of taking money for this..
Besides, there's a lot better work out there given away for free too.
Glad you think the design is worth it though!
Besides, I must've been a bit sleepy when uploading the thing. My e-mail in the info-file is wrong, so please download it again (sorry!)
http://www.madshougaard.dk/downloads/mrh_Anton.zip
-Mads.
23 Jul 2002 — 6:37am
> there's a lot better work out there given away for free
But also a lot worse work offered for sale...
So thanks.
hhp
8 Aug 2002 — 3:29am
Okay okay, this is getting silly now..
I accidentally messed up the international characters in the alternative version, which is now corrected. Having to do this, I couldn't help but altering the alternative a also, because it was simply too hard to read.
So, anybody who have the earlier version, please download once again.. :/
http://www.madshougaard.dk/downloads/mrh_Anton.zip
I promise this is the last thing you will hear about this typeface!
Regards,
Mads