Type Design — comparison of fonts with other fonts

Type Design makes competitive fonts, allowing users to make informed choices on what fonts to use.

On the left is DMCA Sans Serif (publicdomain), on the right are the commercial fonts by LucasFonts.

DMCA Sans SerifTheSans Office
Paperless word‑processing
Hot desking
Public bulletin board
Wide format telephone
Bureau
Nomad worker
Конторский служащий
HOMESOURCING
Air condition missing
DMCA Sans SerifTheSansMono SemiCondensed
NY Inquirer rivals the Chronicle
The hidden investigative reports
Balance objectivity & skepticism
Pulitzer
Muckracker story
infiltrated media
Reached millions
Note
Gonzo journalism
Corruption crime
DOCUMENT
DMCA Sans SerifTheSansMono SemiCondensed Office
Assembly language interpretation
Specify calculations by entering
Unavailability of needed objects
Terminal
Tabulator record
Binary notations
Punch card panel
Code
System algorithm
Buffer overflows
COMPILER


On the left is old version of Fairfax (named [REDACTED] as a parody of RebeccaRGB’s censoring of competitors), on the right is the upcoming Custom Font ttf 5.0. (current Fairfax has different slopes but still bad slopes)



Here is a comparison of a professional document typesetting in DMCA Sans Serif and Riglos.

DMCA Sans Serif:



Riglos:



The following images demonstrate design flaws in Kreative fonts ([REDACTED]=Fairfax, Full HD [REDACTED]=Fairfax HD, [REDACTED] square=Kreative Square). The red text describes how to bugfix the design flaws.

In TrueType, you cannot exceed the font height vertically, or else it will get clipped. RebeccaRGB drew light diagonal box drawing characters with the perpendicular line cap, which might seem cute from a geometrical standpoint, but it is unusable in typography since it gets clipped: Do NOT assume you can ever draw anything above or below the font height boundaries (unsigned short Win Ascent and unsigned short Win Descent).
The “Modular Font Elements” are actually FontStruct tiles, and they can actually be flipped horizontally and/or vertically and/or rotated at an angle of 90° or −90° even though such possibilities are not in Kreative Square. (Worse yet, RebeccaRGB’s suggested solution was to manually transform the tiles in an image editor, in which case you shouldn’t even be using any fonts/text in the first place since that is not a valid typographical operation) When designing private use on the basis of external sources, make sure the glyph set is actually usable in typographical contexts (such as in semigraphical text).
The diagonal fill patterns are chequer patterns in Fairfax, therefore the direction is uncertain. However, Fairfax HD and Kreative Square have diagonals (though not all of them tile properly). RebeccaRGB made claims of these characters being checker patterns but that is clearly not the case, as it is evident that they are supposed to be diagonals. Do NOT hit the Nyquist limit (switch every other pixel) with diagonal lines. Also be sure to ensure it tiles properly because the 2∶1 diagonals don’t tile in Fairfax HD.
The 1FB81 character is not composed correctly. It doesn’t matter that Kreative claims to be ‘authority’ (whatever that means), it doesn’t match the character name. Defined blocks are critical and should be taken literally. The name suggests defined blocks. They should be done horizontally from 0 to advance width, and vertically from WinDescent to WinAscent.
The left/right quarters (that are chequered) are inconsistent with top/bottom eighths (that are rounded). Chequering lines does not make much sense. Instead, try to round consistently.
The superscripts in Unicode and in private use are inconsistent. It isn't a private use issue though, as it is the Unicode superscripts that deviate in Fairfax. If you intend to make larger superscripts, change all superscripts. Do not even try to make tiny superscripts and subscripts, as they are unusable for math purposes. Type Design nowadays recommends about 85%—95% of the black body height in superscripts and subscripts.
The Legacy Computing diagonal fill patterns aren’t 1÷2 of the area in Fairfax. (in actual legacy computing, diagonal fill patterns take half area) Make sure your fonts ARE consistent when you design them to be.
The intersection in the mixed tables in ╫ and ╪ is useless. It doesn’t matter what the majority of the fonts do. Consistency is the most important consideration in fontdevelopment. The presence of this particular design flaw in most fonts can be attributed to basing on character charts disregarding any practical use or optical consideration.
This is what the character tables would look like if there was a table for every style, except there isn’t — only the Regular exists. When the different styles have distinct designs, it is necessary for character charts to include all styles.

Contact Piotr Grochowski below if you want to request a comparison of any of the fonts of Type Design with your font. (not all comparisons on this page were by request)

Here is a comparison between Custom Font ttf and Riglos in the Subset2 character set:



Here is a comparison between Fairfax and Riglos:



Here is a comparison between Riglos Mono (monospaced) and Riglos (proportional):



Contact

Name: Piotr Grochowski
E-mail: piotrunio-2004@wp.pl
AnyDesk: 265 993 303
Widget is loading comments...