Echoing some of the comments in class today (Jan. 31), I really love the pattern created by your 'Bonus' face — your uppercase & lowercase 'z's actually read together as one truly funky, tricked-out uppercase Z, which is an interesting consideration. I know you were intending to look at this as an alphabet system/pattern, but I'd be really curious as to the types of patterns that would emerge as these become typeset in panagrams… my gut says that it's going to be this gorgeous visual puzzle that verges on the unreadable, similar to Tyler's "mis-takey."

In the italic version (and, congrats for attempting one of those!), the 'e' starts to become indistinguishable from the 'o' and the 'a'; something that also occurs in your boldface. But, maybe I'm speaking out of turn, because I noticed that you addressed a new 'e' in your final version of the Roman face, and perhaps this would carry through on subsequent italic & boldface "finals" if you chose to pursue them.

Nice work!

Diana:

You really went places with this project. Your letterforms are inventive and they really look like they are all part of a set. I applaud you for your exploration in form-making.

I may be touching on something Tracy has already mentioned, but I do think these faces work better (legibility-wise) larger than actual size, perhaps as a display face. It really is a "visual puzzle" as Tracy said...but I personally am better able to solve that puzzle at a larger size :)

Great job!

these remind me a lot of susan kare's early work for apple, and i can't remember which one i mean... venice, maybe? you've got the same tyhing goping on that she did in which it's a weird melding of what a human would make by default (a script) and what a computer would make by default (90 and 45 degree angles). it's not very readable at small sizes, but so what? it's pretty. use it big. the system holds together nicely, and there's enough script information there that it has humanity despite its mechanical nature.