After seeing the three typefaces together I was able to identify subtle differences that would affect my decision in choosing one of the three. My explanations are documented below:
- Helvetica - I decided to not use this typeface as a result of its distinct presence within the industry. Using a typeface that is so prominent within design and so recognisable as a result seemed inappropriate in communicating the word "faint" with its connotations of meaning "ill-defined," "obscure" and "unobtrusive."
- Berthold - This typeface's regular weight of line appeared too heavy and bold to be used in the communication of my adjective, and also goes against the advice given to be by my peers in friday's critique to use a medium-weighted typeface.
- Univers - Having inspected this typeface in comparison to Helvetiva and Berthold, I have decided that this is the type of choice in acting as the starting point to develop my letterforms from. Univers has the lightest weight of line of the three, however isn't a light, fine typeface - it will provide sufficient space for a clear and distinct gradient/fade-out without appearing bold. Also, I believe the typeface features a more varied visual from the top, which will be the most legible sector of my typeface. This is evidenced through the letter "t," shown alongside the alternate options.
Having established Univers as my template-typeface, I then began to explore the gradient/fade-out that would give my bespoke typeface its distinct and unparalleled visual language. I experimented with the gradient starting from the highest point, being the ascenders, to the baseline, then three-quarters down, and finally half way down. This is evidenced below:
After exploring the various fade-out levels above, I feel that the most effective treatment is that featured in the middle, where the gradient disappears at three-quarters of the way down the character. This level features the right amount character-fill in that it makes use of previously documented theory, showing the full top half of the letters whilst maintaining legibility. I believe the top treatment features too much fill, allowing the full character to be identified with no real greater sense of legibility. The third treatment exhibits too little fill, beginning to cause legibility and readability concerns.
Although I have successfully established the fade-out level of the letterforms, I think the characters ascenders and very-tops' need be cohesive and consistently darker, as it is these distinct characteristics that will allow for the recognition, identifiability and distinction of the letterforms. To resolve this I began the gradient ever-so slightly below the x-height of the characters, which I believe has enhanced the overall aesthetic of the type and enriched its readability. See below:
In order to further enhance my bespoke typeface and its success in communicating a "faint" aesthetic, I believe subtle rounded-off corners and edges will aid the visual reflection of the loss of sharpness and precision of the mind experienced through the loss of consciousness (fainting). This will also take my typeface's visual characteristics further away from the standard Univers template-typeface.
Below is the faint visual language, now with rounded edges and corners:
I also decided to translate the developed visual language to an upper-case set of characters to ensure the route of lower-case I have chosen is justified and more appropriate in its communication of the word and its terms of legibility/readability. This is exhibited below:
The above upper-case variation of my bespoke type I believe is unsuccessful as result of there being no variation in character height, as with lower-case letters, and therefore makes the treatment harder to perceive and read. The aesthetic of the visual here is too hard and contradicting of the "weak," "indefinite" and "unobtrusive" connotations of the word "faint." I will therefore continue to develop the typeface in lower-case.
No comments:
Post a Comment