5 ms·
this is superficial, but that font looks terrible, at least on my screen. honestly, it looks like an amateur's first attempt at making a font. otherwise it's a
by brosephius 16y ago
this is superficial, but that font looks terrible, at least on my screen. honestly, it looks like an amateur's first attempt at making a font. otherwise it's a cool product idea :)
- nickstamas 16y agoNothing is superficial, we always appreciate feedback. Can you tell me what browser you're using? Most of the site is set in Goudy Bookletter 1911, by The League of Moveable Type. Is this what it looks like in your browser? http://bit.ly/2oH1TM http://bit.ly/2oH1TM
- jesselamb 16y agoDo you mind sending me a screenshot at inquiries@gruntverk.com ? You're not the first to comment on the typeface. Just trying to see if we're failing on taste or tech. :)
- brosephius 16y agohttp://i.imgur.com/6bcnn.png http://i.imgur.com/6bcnn.png notice how the r and l characters seem to be a bit higher, and (at least in my opinion) the b and o chars seems to be too "fat", especially relative to the e. also, the bottom part of the a looks too thick...just overall looks a bit weird, definitely not like what nickstamas posted above. this is in FF 3.6.8 on XP with cleartype enabled, btw.
- jesselamb 16y agoHoly crap, that looks horrible! We'll work on it. Thank you so much for the screenshot.