New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Create an account
Typophile RSS | More Feeds
Can anyone ID this, I've been looking at similar fonts but can't seem to find it.
Thanks in advance for any help.
I'd concentrate my search on "free" fonts, as the typeface design isn't up to typical commercial standards.
My money is on Regular from Gestalten. They also did Blender which is more chiseled.
Great shot CreativeNRG, I just checked "Regular" and I can't find any discrepancies, I think that's exactly it. I was already aware of Blender so that's two I'm interested in from the same foundry. Why do you say the quality is poor Thomas, I'm not a typographer but I've been a graphic designer for two decades and I can't see any problems, educate me please if I'm missing something.
Cheers both of you for taking the time to respond.
Perhaps I was being overly hasty, but there were two things that made me assume that it wasn't likely a regular retail font.
1) The slightly clunky transitions of curves to straight lines are pretty typical of average "free" fonts, and almost never seen in decent quality retail fonts.
2) Making the horizontal strokes the exact same thickness as the vertical strokes. If they want them to *look* the same thickness, they should make the verticals a bit thicker than the horizontals, to give the visual appearance of a constant thickness.
These are both typical beginner mistakes in type design. I suppose they could be doing these things knowingly and on purpose, trying for a deliberately naive look. They succeeded well enough to fool me at first glance. :/ First time I've been wrong when I expected something to be a "free font."
OK, thanks. Having vertical and horizontal strokes of the same weight suits me for digital display because of the low res output, the optical correction you refer to won't show up at 72dpi, however I understand your point. Thanks for explaining.
It may suit you, and of course you can choose as you like. But it creates a visibly "wrong" result. The optical correction I refer to is quite visible at 72 dpi, including in the sample shown, which is how I noticed it as a problem in that font. We're talking something like 5-15% difference in stroke thickness, which in the sample shown would have made a difference of 1-2 pixels.