3 ms·
Perhaps they should've used something similar to the 9. However then it wouldn't really look like a lower-case g.
by bartvk 6mo ago
Perhaps they should've used something similar to the 9. However then it wouldn't really look like a lower-case g.
- antraip 6mo agoHere is how I would personally modify lowercase g: xxx x x xxxxx x xxxx It looks a bit like a 9 but the descender is different. (Could play around with how many x's to put on the first and third lines, particularly whether to set the first/last bits on those lines as "corners" or make it more rounded.) I would also modify the top of lowercase e in a similar fashion.
- JoshTriplett 6mo agoI might do something like this instead: xx x x xx x x xx A little awkward, but very distinct from the 9. The reason to narrow the head of it is to allow the end of the descender to rise upwards without turning it into an 8.