Cerulea returns: weights, italics, Greek, Cyrillic

cerulean's picture

I've been picking at this for a long, long time, and I think that it's finally going to be ready for release just as soon as I can whittle down the kerning pairs so that it doesn't drop half of them at random upon generation (apparently 250 pairs is too many... and yes, there are classes), and then learn how to do the hinting right.

Before I do, though, I should start letting other people look at it again. Is there anything I don't see? (I see the crap kerning.) I'm particularly interested in opinions on how I've handled the nonLatin alphabets. I know there is something inherently perverse about making Greek into a biform unicase, but Cyrillic takes to it quite naturally, and I hope it's as successful as I, an anglophone, think it is. Are there any unacceptable transgressions? And, if you hope to use this font yourself, no matter where you are, are there any characters you would expect to use that are conspicuous in their absence?

cerulea09.pdf394.55 KB
cerulea10.pdf394.52 KB
Quincunx's picture

250 kerning pairs actually isn't that much. If it doesn't work, the problem must be something else.

Bendy's picture

Yes, I've heard of fonts having several thousand kerning pairs, I think...
This is pretty neat. I like the quirky way you have serifs blended with cut-off terminals (like on the G or between the S and T for instance). I love the caps especially. There's a kind of uncial feel going on in there too, which is surprising considering the sharp edges. The AKMWY are my favourites. I find the lowercase letters less successful and the curves look less polished. I find 2 unbalanced (always my hardest glyph by far!) and the regular e somehow distorted up close. I think £ could have a lower crossbar like the F? There's something wrong with the bottom curve of a in the bold and black, where it retroflexes back down to join the stem.
Your italic ampersand is fascinating. Bold and black somehow look better to me than the regular, not sure why. Can't say anything about the nonlatin glyphs I'm afraid.

michaelcina's picture

Nice work, seems like the Cyrillic/Greek really outshines the other letters for sure. The latin characters "e" and the R's could use a bit more work but the rest are pretty consistent.

As far as the kerning issues, normally if I have kerning issues, the font is not spaced properly. Spacing is 99% of making a font look good also. Kerning really cements the fine details but if you are having to kern one letter a lot more than the others, its probably a spacing issue.

maxispr's picture

This is not a critique.
Or maybe a good critique, (all critiques are good, they help, I know)
Your project is awesome. It looks really elegant.
I love the italic variable, it is so fluid over text.
I think the minuscule "a" of the regular latin version is a bit overweighted, but just a bit, it may be because of its top part which is a bit thicker than I think it should be.
This is my opinion, only my opinion.
I strong believe that your font is superb, so keep it up!
Maximiliano R. Sproviero

Lián Types.-

cerulean's picture

Thanks very much; I've made adjustments benefiting from just about all of your comments, plus some others from my friends (the s was lacking overshoot, for instance). See the new pdf.

The missing pairs were caused by putting multiple alphabets all into the same kerning classes. I've separated the classes out, but I still need to sort them into their language categories.

Can you help me decide: The crossbar of the regular Latin capital A is really low, originally owing to the face's concept of big spacious counters wherever possible. I raised the crossbar some in its Greek and Cyrillic equivalents lest they be too easily confused with Δ and Д. Should I also change the Latin A to match, or is it okay that way?

fonterior's picture

Font is beautiful but:
There are many mistakes in cyrillic :(
Some cyrillic glyphs look archaic, ЛД.
Some cyrillic glyphs is very ugly, ЖЙКУ and other
There is not understandable, do you want to make small capitals or lowercase letters. They are mixed now.

There is useful for you to look similar cyrillic fonts
as this http://www.paratype.ru/pstore/default.asp?fcode=PT_FRQ&letter=F

ps. sorry my english

cerulean's picture

The mixing of lowercase forms with capitals is a deliberate trait of the whole typeface. But ignore the lowercase if you prefer.
Can you describe more specifically what is wrong with the glyphs you listed?

fonterior's picture

Tilted vertical strokes in ЛД (as in daxline) is not traditional solution for cyrillic alphabet.
Interesting debate about this subjects was in lj
Leadinging designers have named such drawing of the letters «horrible».

Traditional form of the letters is here


Tail of б must be rise above lowercase letters.

Latin variant of К looks more organic than cyrillic. It is better to use it for cyrillic. It is necessary to correct Ж.

Breve in Й is too small.

Rest letters looking not so terribly but unaccustomed for russian eye.

cerulean's picture


There seems to be some dissent about the splayed ЛД so I will make them alternates. The lowercase form of б I will just discard, for the same reason there is no Latin b or d.

I imagine my italic и compromise is even more of an abomination? Should I just make it a u?

4thfebruary's picture

Maybe I understand nothing, please review again S. All glyphs with serifs, capital S without serifs. Make top of A, Delta more higher, at normal view this glyphs looks lower than B D for example.

Syndicate content Syndicate content