In my final analysis of the hesitant typeface i conclude that i have effectively expressed my given adjective of hesitant to a high standard in which other designers and people could easily perceive from my final design. My typeface is constructed of letter forms that have varied stroke widths, the lower parts of the strokes are thicker and the strokes get thinner the further up the letter. This create a contrast, and also suggests that the lower part of the letter is reluctant to move and is shy, unlike the higher parts of the stroke that are trying to pull away. The original Baskerville typeface also had varied stroke withs but it was very discrete, by emphasising this i transformed the typeface to relate to my given adjective.
If i was t develop the typeface further i would definitely create an italic version as Italics could be consider hesitant as they are usually smaller, and lighter than normal letter styles, this would emphasis the style of shy and hesitant more.
When evaluating the letter forms individually it was obvious that some expressed the style of hesitant more than others such as ‘q’ the slight tilt to the left that was achieved through the stroke width change made the letter look more hesitant than the rest as it appeared to be leaning. The varying stroke width were very obvious in this letter form compared to those of ‘w’ and ‘y’. I also feel that the ‘g’ looks shy compared to the other letter forms, this may be because half of the letter from is below the base line unlike and other letter form and could be suggested as trying to hide away and be smaller than the rest.
When developing my type specimen i decide to express the complexity of the hesitant typeface as a poster with a layered background of many of the letters. This creates a textured background that created interest and emphasised the differing stroke widths on a large scale. I thought this was important as the varying stroke widths were the main focus of the typeface to make it represent my adjective.
No comments:
Post a Comment