Thanks for the feedback Mike. Criticial appraisal is more useful than universal praise.
I checked the numbers for Garava Regular, but I couldn't see anything wrong. The 3,5,6, and 8 all undershoot by -25 — the same as the capital C The top of the 1 and 4 align with the top of 7 and flat top of 5, which are at the Caps top of 1434 funits. Only thing wrong that I could spot is the buttom bowls of the 3 and 5 are a bit too thin — only 34 funits instead of 50 for the "C"
Garava - My First Proper Font
-
- Top Typographer
- Posts: 9877
- Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 5:28 am
- Location: Seven Kings, London UK
- Contact:
-
- Top Typographer
- Posts: 408
- Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 11:10 pm
- Location: Massachusetts
- Contact:
Aesthetics of your numbers
Bhikkhu!
I'm not sure you should need 'to check', it is the quick glance
that reveals aesthetics. What I saw may be an illusion but I
did see it. The numbers don't SEEM to have some of the interesting
features I see in the characters.
I get this impression by looking at the whole sample at once
rather than by studying each character.
I do like the font a lot!
Mike
I'm not sure you should need 'to check', it is the quick glance
that reveals aesthetics. What I saw may be an illusion but I
did see it. The numbers don't SEEM to have some of the interesting
features I see in the characters.
I get this impression by looking at the whole sample at once
rather than by studying each character.
I do like the font a lot!
Mike
I've been looking at Garava again. In the days of metal type, the inking process was of the utmost importance and had to be very carefully monitored. If there was too liberal an application, sharp corners, say where a curved stroke met a straight stroke at an acute angle, the angle became clogged with ink. I've seen poorly printed text exhibiting this fault. It is my opinion, and only an opinion, that the 'b' 'd' 'p' and 'q' look as if this has happened, however impossible this is nowadays. This doesn't detract from a great effort.
Joe.