Many of the corrections Thomas had recommended I have corrected as they were said the same by Tomato. I suppose it's good that they agree (without knowing it), as it shows they were genuine problems over stylistic opinions.
A few thoughts that might help you polish things a bit more:
- straight-to-round transition in the D seems a bit sudden (done from Tomato's crit)
- The 6 and 9 feel out of place. They could probably use a ball terminal like the 5 and 2. Also, the top of the 6 and bottom of the 9 are a bit heavy at the extrema. (done from Tomato's crit)
- given the other number designs (5, 6 and 9), the 8 might work better if the loops crossed at a more oblique angle (less like an X), and perhaps if the lower loop was just slightly bigger and the top loop just slightly smaller. (done from Tomato's crit)
- ring accent is strangely wide (keep the same, I quite like it)
- the alternate A and B that have the fully-looped swash are not working so well. Especially the B. I know it's relatively monoline, but many of the swashes seem more monoline than the rest of the font. Look at the thick/thin contrast in the cap O, and apply that to your swashes, and see if it helps. TO DO.
- the serifs are as heavy as they can possibly be without being silly. I'm wondering if it would look better if they were just 10 units thinner. (Assuming you're on a 1000-unit em square.) (keep the same, I quite like it)
Corrections
(See Critique from Tomato Kosir for most corrections)
Before:
Corrections
(See Critique from Tomato Kosir for most corrections)
Before:
After:
As you can see, I have taken the width of the curve of the O, to create something more consisastant and less monolinuar.
