search

adobe-fonts / source-serif

Typeface for setting text in many sizes, weights, and languages. Designed to complement Source Sans.
https://adobe-fonts.github.io/source-serif
SIL Open Font License 1.1
2.15k stars 161 forks source link

Optical Sizes #57

Closed frankrolf closed 3 years ago

frankrolf commented 5 years ago

@ReymundS and @late2game will handle the extension of Source Serif into optical sizes Display and Caption. This issue is for tracking the work, and for answering any questions.

RuixiZhang42 commented 5 years ago

Since Source Serif Pro Math https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-serif-pro/issues/13 is also on the roadmap, it would be nice to also include a “Tiny” optical size for the second-order sub/superscripts as well (Caption could be used for first-order sub/superscripts).

I’ll add some links to the Source Serif Pro Math thread.

frankrolf commented 5 years ago

Thank you for the kickoff meeting today, Reymund and Thomas! Here are the scale values I used to prepare the first step toward Caption- and Display masters: https://gist.github.com/frankrolf/44ebc3c8157bef1591e0174d95fe09a6

frankrolf commented 5 years ago

This is the normalizeAll shell script I use: https://github.com/adobe-type-tools/shell-scripts. UFOnormalizer needs to be installed, which can just be done using pip or pip3 (see instructions here: https://github.com/unified-font-object/ufoNormalizer )

ReymundS commented 5 years ago

• Frank recommends an adaptation/modulation of the (head)serifs in both »Caption« and »Display«. • »Caption«: Inktraps in the bold version to be proofed. • Frank basically agrees with the proposals for f, g, t, ß as well as the cyrillic “d”, “l” – but also with the basic parameters.

Source Compare.pdf

frankrolf commented 5 years ago

You brought up an interesting point with the relationship of Д vs Л. I discussed this screenshot with Maria Doreuli, see below what she has to say: Screen Shot 2019-06-25 at 14 20 53

I find the right one better related to the Л and I think it makes sense. Although to my eye the left side of the right version of the Д is a little too static and the bottom left horizontal segment a little too short. The new form will help to avoid a large space on the left of the glyph and also perform better in Bolder weights The left stroke should still be rather diagonal than vertical

So while the modification is welcome, it needs to be less heavy-handed – please make sure the left stroke still curls, has some kind of diagonality, and please don’t shorten the platform of the “teeth”.

Concerning the horizontal top of those teeth – I was thinking about this a lot, and I actually think it’s counter-productive to make them look exactly like the serifs. The weight needs to be present, and filing on the top removes quite a bit of it. What I would suggest instead is making other occurences of the vertical teeth horizontal, or at least thicker on top. Here are some examples from other typefaces:

Screen Shot 2019-06-28 at 16 15 49 Screen Shot 2019-06-28 at 16 15 35

late2game commented 5 years ago

Glad Maria approved the quick and dirty proposal.

I tried to follow her instruction and made the left stroke a bit more diagonal and got back to the original teeth. I also tried to streamline the dot droplets so that they evolve a bit better throughout the weights. Maybe you should show this to Maria again to be sure that we are on the safe side. The SC are still to be done, but I'd like to have your and/or Maria's GO before I continue.

Below are 2 screenshots that show the result for all 3 roman weights for UC and LC as well as a PDF for closer inspection.

Source Cyr De + El Source CYR De + El 2 Source Serif CYR De + El.pdf

late2game commented 5 years ago

We already had a quick chat on the ending of the LC terminals and I'd like to share this here. We agreed that it's a good idea to have the terminals ending straight for Display, but we didn't agreed if all should end straight or only the top terminals of m, n, p, r.

Source LAT terminals Source Serif LAT terminals.pdf

frankrolf commented 5 years ago

Since Source Serif follows Fournier in some (not all) decisions, I think it makes sense to consult the source material in this case. Here is an example: 2013-06-22_193153

As we can see here, most top terminals are straight, some even slightly angled forward. Angled top terminals are a good idea in text sizes to avoid clumping, but since you are working on the display style, I agree it sounds like a good idea to straighten them. One thing I’m noticing though – in the p it looks like the incision from stem to bowl became shallower – is that an optical illusion, or a deliberate change? I think it needs to be a little deeper (compare w/ n).

late2game commented 5 years ago

Ok, so we make all terminals straight. The difference in incision is deliberate since it appears in the text, but it seems that it gets more obvious with straight terminals. See screenshot below left = text, right = display.

np - incision

frankrolf commented 5 years ago

Concerning ДЛ - here are comments from Maria: Source Serif CYR De + El

Source.Serif.CYR.De.+.El.pdf

late2game commented 5 years ago

All her comments make sense and will be implemented these coming days. I'm surprised we even got a "nice" from her, that's not very common with native speakers.

ReymundS commented 5 years ago

As a visual reference for the first commit there is the following PDF showing UC and LC (all upright masters) in both »Caption« as well as »Display«.

Source Serif C-D.pdf

frankrolf commented 5 years ago

Dear @ReymundS and @late2game, thanks very much for your work! It all looks very promising, and I think we are going in the right direction on either end of the spectrum. One of the largest changes I propose is that the Black display master could maybe even get a little more contrast.

I have marked up a few things in the PDF proof, see here: Source Serif C-D_marked up.pdf

late2game commented 5 years ago

Dear @frankrolf, thanks for the fast and productive feedback! The increased contrast in Black is quite beneficial. Before I'm going to make another commit to Display I'd like to show you a PDF that has all the latest changes. Please, have closer look on the last 3 pages where I've some doubts.

You can find the latest Display PDF here: Source Serif Display update.pdf

frankrolf commented 5 years ago

Untitled

Here I was pointing out two things:

Untitled2

I think I might have been commenting on the bad rasterization of my printout here: Scan 1

Still, In the heaviest display master, I feel the top curve of the bowl coming out of the stem has an ever-so-tiny little upward swelling. Maybe it can be straightened out?

Untitled3

I was seeing this in context with the e, and I felt there was a visible difference. Ironically, it looks thicker blown up like this: Scan

Let’s keep an eye on this one, no need to change anything for that w right this moment.

FloraCanou commented 5 years ago

I have an idea, just for reference. Higher contrast in letter widths contributes positively to the title type, as is explicitly commented by Akira Kobayashi in his book European Fonts II.

Currently the O and E have basically the same width, which is good for text size, but that looks forced for Display. Thus, it could be favorable for letters like C, D, G, M, O, Q, W to be made wider.

frankrolf commented 5 years ago

@FloraCanou Thanks for the suggestion! We will consider it.

ReymundS commented 4 years ago

Reworked and streamlined basic roman alphabet ( UC / LC ) according to the last review as well as the first italic proposal to match the new romans. — »Caption«: optimized details, optimized proportions, interpolatet testweights »Display«: optimized contrast, optimized serifs, optimized proportions

Source Serif UC-LC.pdf

frankrolf commented 4 years ago

Dear Reymund and Thomas, thank you for your work! I’m very happy with how the project is progressing, and have only a few things to say:

Source.Serif.UC-LC_abridged_annotated_fg.pdf

frankrolf commented 4 years ago

Design-Modifikationen Caption Roman

Design-Modifikationen Caption Italic

frankrolf commented 4 years ago

Design-Modifikationen Display Roman

Design-Modifikationen Display Italic

frankrolf commented 4 years ago

Design-Modifikationen Text Roman

Design-Modifikationen Text Italic

davelab6 commented 4 years ago

What's the current status of this work? :)

frankrolf commented 4 years ago

Hi @davelab6, @late2game and @ReymundS delivered their work in the end of March, and ever since I’ve been merging all threads together. It takes long as usual, for a detailed list of things I’m doing I recommend peeking at my commit messages: https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-serif-pro/commits/opsz

The whole family has gone through QE once already, and will again after this week. I predict the completion of my work on this family for August.

frankrolf commented 3 years ago

@davelab6 The family is now in its final QE pass, I hope to release the family after that.

frankrolf commented 3 years ago

Thanks to the remarkable work of @late2game and @ReymundS, the addition of optical sizes has been completed. Source Serif now has 60 static styles (instead of 12), and I personally think the optical size axis makes the family a whole lot more versatile. A specimen site like this wouldn’t have been possible before: https://adobe-fonts.github.io/source-serif/

Thanks again, Reymund and Thomas! 🎉

davelab6 commented 3 years ago

Amazing work! Thank you Reymund, Thomas, Frank and everyone else who has made this a success (listed here :)

throwaway571 commented 3 years ago

@frankrolf For reference, what point sizes is each optical size designed for?

RuixiZhang42 commented 3 years ago

@throwaway571 Based on how the static font instances are named, the optical size convention is likely to follow Adobe’s in-house recommendation: caption (6-8 point), regular (9-13 point), subhead (14-24 point) and display (25-72 point). See, for example, https://www.adobe.com/ca/products/type/opentype.html

frankrolf commented 3 years ago

I will detail this in a blog post, coming soon. Based on my own testing on the specimen page, I decided on the following sizes:

 8pt Caption
16pt SmText
20pt Text
32pt Subhead
60pt Display

Master designs exist for 8pt, 20pt, 60pt.