Modular Type Design

Modular Type Design

In the beginning of this project, I had a little bit of a tough time trying to make a grid that I could use to make a font. My main goal was to create a font that was light and aggressive. I ended up going with a grid that was made of small triangles, and I wanted to use a larger triangle as a rule – the letters had to fit into this larger triangle (with some exceptions). The lowercase letters have a slightly different ruleset, I wanted them to have some sort of variation from the uppercase version, although some do look quite similar. As for the exceptions I allowed, through creating the letters I thought that the “D” would look good if I made the original sized triangle and rotated it. I also decided that I couldn’t really get around making the capital “i” any other way, than to just take the bottom side of the triangle and place it on top.

 

Looking at my font, I think that I would describe it as light, aggressive, and geometric. Honestly, it’s hard for me to really picture an entire word or sentence made using this font. More so, I think that my font’s letters might be used for logo designs, in which other design techniques are incorporated with one to three letters.

 

Based on Gestalt principles, I think similarity, symmetry, and closure are the most important in my design.

Similarity: I tried my best to make sure that the letters fit into the same sized triangle framework. In those regards, all the letters have a general sense of triangularity. In another sense, the lowercase letters might resemble the uppercase letters with small adjustments.

Symmetry: I think this is closely related to the principle of similarity in my typeface. The triangle framework I was using is symmetrical. As a whole, I think my uppercase letters seem to be pretty symmetrical with a few exceptions.

Closure & Continuity: “The principle of continuity states that elements that are arranged on a line or curve are perceived to be more related than elements not on the line or curve.” I believe that closure and continuity relate closely for my design. All the typeface elements in my design are arranged within a triangle – three lines. Sometimes these lines do not fully connect to another, such as B,G,K, P, Q, and R. At the same time, I think it is clear to understand that they are letters without being fully connected.

 

I feel that for the most part, my font feels like they belong together, with the exception of a few letters that I’m not exactly happy with. When dealing with ascenders, descenders, cap height, and x-height, my main goal was to make it so that the baseline was where all the letters sat on, and which they would not go below. I wanted to have all of the uppercase letters to be the same height, and all the lowercase letters to be the same height. In this way, I was trying to create some consistency. As I notice now, this method could not be completely applicable to each letter. In my opinion, there are a few letters that feel out of place. If you look at the picture that has the entire typeface, it feels as though they all go together quite well. But when you look at the pangram, you can realize that some letters, like the lowercase “v” seem slightly out of place.

Overall, though, I feel that most of my designed letters are consistent in terms of weight, contrast, width, and posture. It’s hard to stray too far from letter to letter in these terms when I was using the same triangle for each letter. However, I can admit that it’s far from perfect, and far from where I would have liked it to be – but that’s the perfectionist in me talking.

shares
%d bloggers like this: