 |
| Final Typeface Design |
 |
 |
| Type Specimen |
Overall, the feedback for my typeface was positive. This proves that it does work for what I intended it to be created for - a display face for high fashion and luxury brands. The only criticisms were that the typeface could be confused with the manifestos whether or not it is the superficial definition or the shallow definition was a comment one person wrote and a few people picked up on the fact that the J could be misconstrued as an I so that would need alternating. There are also issues with the removal of the serifs on S and G which I had overlooked so I need to be more vigilant in my next piece of work for mistakes such as this. I like my final typeface resolution though and found the production of this was much better than the first brief.
Here I constructed my typeface into the sentence 'The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.' because it uses all the letters in the alphabet. This shows that it works effectively within a sentence and can be legible when the different letterforms are placed together.
This is my final typeface design. I decided to go with the first manifesto because my crit group unanimously agreed that they had liked the concept and design decisions behind it. I placed the typeface into the sentence “the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog” to show that the typeface does work in accordance together within a sentence and is legible and easily read. I think it does demonstrate my design objective of creating a display face which can be applicable to for prestigious brands because Bodoni is originally used for high fashion brands. The simplicity and minimalism would attract companies that are aiming to achieve a more effortless, elegant typeface for their design which I think my shallow typeface achieves.
I also believe that my specimen shows it can be used as a visually attractive typeface which would be aimed at prestigious brands. The fluidity of the R is why I placed it at a large scale against the background. It shows that the design is flat and would look attractive on multiple surfaces because it is so easily adaptable to different scales. I think the typeface I have created does reflect my manifesto.
1.What words would you use to describe my typeface?
“Classical - confident and ‘modern’ face.” ,“Modern and fancy” , “Geometric (expection of Q&R)” , “Sharp, sleek” , “fancy, sleek, modern” , “minimal & sheek” , “posh” , “high class, minimalistic, friendly.”
2.Does my typeface work for the audience I’m trying to adapt it to? (Luxury brands)
“Lucy bath company or candles?” , “Yes, very classic, old feel” , “Yes, very luxury could be used on perfume bottles”, “Yes, jewellery brand”, “if you are a high end company, you wouldn’t want to appear as being “shallow” through the use of this typeface.” , “Luxury brands - yes in all areas from signage to print & web - from the heritage you evolved it from.”
3.Does my typeface work as display text? (If not why?)
“Yes” was the answer for all of the people that commented on my typeface.
“Both display & body text will work on them in @classical@ but dependent on weights.”
4.Is the removal of serifs effective to portray a more contemporary typeface?
A majority of people said “yes” and added comments such as:
“makes it more simple & cleaner”
“on some letter forms but looks out of place on the s compared to the other letters”
“makes more modern although serifs sometimes signify class.”
“yes shows balance / development of old and new”
“serif removal is a really great exercise to ‘contemporise’ a font - it works really well.”
Any other feedback:
“s & g looks like you have forgotten to remove the serifs”
“I like the J maybe change I to an I with serifs”
“curves on the x & z maybe try pointed for consistance”
“works really well as a set - very consistent”
“the style = yes, the concept = i think people would be unsure but very clever.”
No comments:
Post a Comment