Reviewing Montserrat

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi All,

I was asked to review and work on the popular Google Font Montserrat, by Julieta Ulanovsky. This thread is to keep you updated.

[Dave Crossland]

I'm excited to see what changes you'll make so it is even better! :D 

[Carolina Giovagnoli]

Super!

[Jacques Le Bailly]

I'm excited to see what changes you'll make so it is even better! :D 

I'll try my best :)

I made some sketches on how to make the round shapes looking less diamond shaped. I made the Black master slightly wider, because it looked too narrow IMHO.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

After reworking the uppercase O, I continued with some other round capitals (and the E).

Top is reviewed, bottom is original. The round shapes now look a lot less diamond shaped. Notice that I have made the horizontal strokes thinner by one unit in the Thin weight. In the original the horizontals were numeric as thick as the verticals, both 20 units.

The rounds shapes in the Black weight are now just a little bit wider, to support the geometric consistency.

I kept the RSB and LSB the same.

[Dave Crossland]

Subtle stufd, but great work :)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/AA9E5953-8D63-4756-A188-C680FE0AFA1E%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Subtle stufd, but great work :)

You want it more explicit ? ;)

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello!

For me it looks very well!

In the thinner G I notice that the vertical line is heavier. That will be in balance with the circle (in small sizes)?

In the black weight, the original is below?

Thanks!

Besos

Julieta 

2017-07-13 9:50 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonth...@baronvonfonthausen.com>:

Subtle stufd, but great work :)

You want it more explicit ? ;)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/459A5408-BA36-489B-B1A5-C7970263915B%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta !

For me it looks very well!

Thanks ! :)

In the thinner G I notice that the vertical line is heavier. That will be in balance with the circle (in small sizes)?

In the black weight, the original is below?

I’ll have a look at the Thin G. When the stroke is only 20 units, making it thinner by one unit is already 5% ! :)

Yes, in the black weight the original is below.

Best,

Jacques

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Great! I see it better!!!
Thank you :)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/DFFAB43C-5FF9-4A40-B5F0-34216F25E158%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

I continued working on the review/corrections of Montserrat. Before/after PDF and GIFs.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

I see it very well. I like the changes :)

2017-07-16 19:47 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonth...@baronvonfonthausen.com>:

I continued working on the review/corrections of Montserrat. Before/after PDF and GIFs.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/25D29704-956B-4486-94D2-565B1290DF11%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Jacques, it can be useful to see the changes applied in words. I like the glyphs alone but we have to see them in action, writing words. What do you think?

Thank you!

2017-07-17 11:01 GMT-03:00 Julieta Ulanovsky <julieta....@gmail.com>:

I see it very well. I like the changes :)

2017-07-16 19:47 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonthausen@baronvonfonthausen.com>:

I continued working on the review/corrections of Montserrat. Before/after PDF and GIFs.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

Jacques, it can be useful to see the changes applied in words. I like the glyphs alone but we have to see them in action, writing words. What do you think?

Sure, I will set some words with the characters I already worked on. I’ll do it tonight after diner :)

Here are two screenshot of the uppercase S I have been working on today. It was a little puzzle :) . IMHO, the Black version looked a lot more closed than the Thin version. And the Thin had some flow issues. I tried to find and average form and top/bottom proportion to keep as much as possible to the original.

This is the original:

This is the reworked version. The overall weight and contrast is more balanced now and the Black doesn’t have the tendency to fall over any more.

Best,

Jacques

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Julieta,

I made some words with the characters I worked on. I added a PDF, so you can see it in high resolution.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello Jacques, thank you!
I am looking carefully.
I hope tomorrow have some comments.
Thank you again!
Besos
Julieta

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/C542E7DF-52D6-49E6-81E7-33C69F0B3614%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/C542E7DF-52D6-49E6-81E7-33C69F0B3614%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

> Hello Jacques, thank you!
> I am looking carefully.
> I hope tomorrow have some comments.
> Thank you again!

I am curious and exited about your comments. Keep in mind I tried to get good consistency in proportion, color and details across both masters.

I will be posting stuff as a go along. Next week I will on holiday with my family, so I will not be online.

Best,
Jacques

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello Jacques, Hello Dave, Hello Juan and Caro

I was looking carefully the signs in both versions. I like very much the work of Jacques. I like the "J" a lot and all the reviewed glyphs in general. I am not sure with Q but I am still thinking... I think it is necessary to fix the curve (a little less, not that open). And I have some doubts with the encounter of the “T” and the “F” (in the word “left” for example).

I know that the final result and the different width is not an issue BUT may be we can think some strategy, or something like that to avoid the complains and problems... or just relax and enjoy :) 

Thank you all, 

¡Seguimos!

Besos

Julieta

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/94FAA929-31F0-4345-9136-36EE4ACBD364%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

> I was looking carefully the signs in both versions. I like very much the work of Jacques. I like the "J" a lot and all the reviewed glyphs in general. I am not sure with Q but I am still thinking... I think it is necessary to fix the curve (a little less, not that open). And I have some doubts with the encounter of the “T” and the “F” (in the word “left” for example).
>
> I know that the final result and the different width is not an issue BUT may be we can think some strategy, or something like that to avoid the complains and problems... or just relax and enjoy :)

I am glad you are happy about the work. It is always a gamble when working for someone else :)

About the F and T. That is something we can work out at the end if necessary !

Best,
Jacques

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Great!

Thank you.

Seguimos!

Besos

Best,
Jacques

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/6606DDE3-4294-4786-930B-E735157E235B%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

I continued working on the uppercase and alternates. Here some screenshots.

I started working on the lowercase.

This is the lowercase a. I added a brace layer to counter the thin upper and lower strokes of the eye.

Tonight I will show you more lowercase I working on.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi all,

I have been working on the lowercase. Here are the characters I have been working on.

Like for the lowercase /a, I added a brace layer for the lowercase /e.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello!

It looks very good!

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/B38DFA96-DEFD-4BEF-8427-C30B5B96C3B3%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

This week I continued working on Montserrat, after going on vacation for a week :)

I worked on the uppercase and the lowercase. Next step is to check the combining accents. After that I will use the uppercase to re-create the smallcaps.

[Dave Crossland]

Great stuff :) I was lucky to meet Julieta here in NYC and she told me how she is happy with your efforts :) 

For the PDF, it would be helpful for me to see the difference between the current release and your latest version, perhaps alternating pages with the same layout in the PDF? 

[Jacques Le Bailly]

> Great stuff :) I was lucky to meet Julieta here in NYC and she told me how she is happy with your efforts :)

That is good to hear ! It is always a gamble :)

> For the PDF, it would be helpful for me to see the difference between the current release and your latest version, perhaps alternating pages with the same layout in the PDF?

I made a new one, I hope you meant something like this. Otherwise I can make another one.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

2017-08-04 6:08 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonth...@baronvonfonthausen.com>:

> Great stuff :) I was lucky to meet Julieta here in NYC and she told me how she is happy with your efforts :)

>>>  Absolutely!  

That is good to hear ! It is always a gamble :)

>>>  Sorry my delay. Yesterday was a loooong (and beautiful) day  

> For the PDF, it would be helpful for me to see the difference between the current release and your latest version, perhaps alternating pages with the same layout in the PDF?

I made a new one, I hope you meant something like this. Otherwise I can make another one.

>>> I think it is clear, but there are some things that I don´t understand. For example, the M and W in all caps (alternates, thinner) you go narrow. But in others weights you don´t. Even you go wired in the Regular ones (in W). Is about style? I think it will be usefull to see in action (in some words) the glyphs and define if they go that narrow, and what would happen in the other weights. 

I can´t stop thinking about the matter of the width. I wonder, how will do the people when the website changes, or it will be imperceptible? Is something that we can think before? (to prepare some answers, solutions and advices to avoid problems).

By the other hand, I think that the issue of width will be clear when the kerning is ready. Now, in all pages you add No Kerning (is because is not ready, right?)

Thank you so much!

Besos from NY early and rainy and beautiful.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/D91E30ED-43C9-42D4-AB52-3EC9D5FA40F6%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

>
> >>> I think it is clear, but there are some things that I don´t understand. For example, the M and W in all caps (alternates, thinner) you go narrow. But in others weights you don´t. Even you go wired in the Regular ones (in W). Is about style? I think it will be usefull to see in action (in some words) the glyphs and define if they go that narrow, and what would happen in the other weights.

I made a new proof concentrating on the w, m, W and M. Maybe you now can see it in another light.
If you want the alternates to become wider, this shouldn’t be a problem !

> I can´t stop thinking about the matter of the width. I wonder, how will do the people when the website changes, or it will be imperceptible? Is something that we can think before? (to prepare some answers, solutions and advices to avoid problems).
>
> By the other hand, I think that the issue of width will be clear when the kerning is ready. Now, in all pages you add No Kerning (is because is not ready, right?)

My goal was to emphasize the geometric contraction and to create proportions that would fit accordingly. I also lowered the contrast a little bit to get the Poster/handmade feeling really strong.

Best,
Jacques

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

2017-08-04 9:09 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonth...@baronvonfonthausen.com>:

Hi Julieta,
>
> >>> I think it is clear, but there are some things that I don´t understand. For example, the M and W in all caps (alternates, thinner) you go narrow. But in others weights you don´t. Even you go wired in the Regular ones (in W). Is about style? I think it will be usefull to see in action (in some words) the glyphs and define if they go that narrow, and what would happen in the other weights.

I made a new proof concentrating on the w, m, W and M. Maybe you now can see it in another light.
If you want the alternates to become wider, this shouldn’t be a problem !

I would like to understand the decision... is about style? legibility? Anyway, I like how it looks, you are right, there is no need to be that wider.

And, I like so much how looks the wider W Regular. I think it looks very well. And can share the same last name with that differences, right?  :)

 

> I can´t stop thinking about the matter of the width. I wonder, how will do the people when the website changes, or it will be imperceptible? Is something that we can think before? (to prepare some answers, solutions and advices to avoid problems).
>
> By the other hand, I think that the issue of width will be clear when the kerning is ready. Now, in all pages you add No Kerning (is because is not ready, right?)

My goal was to emphasize the geometric contraction and to create proportions that would fit accordingly. I also lowered the contrast a little bit to get the Poster/handmade feeling really strong.

Best,
Jacques

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/A30F4857-1200-4D26-8A99-D91F2CEA0662%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

> I would like to understand the decision... is about style? legibility? Anyway, I like how it looks, you are right, there is no need to be that wider.

I made a little chart to give you an idea on how I built up the proportions. And I am trying to do that through all glyphs and weights.

In the description on your website (http://montserrat.zkysky.com.ar/) I have found a lot of picture of very geometric characters. Al most monoline, with no or very little contrast. This what is am trying to go to. Not all the way, because I don’t want everything to become clogged up in smaller sizes.

> And, I like so much how looks the wider W Regular. I think it looks very well. And can share the same last name with that differences, right? :)

The W is a good example of going nearly monoline :)

Best,
Jacques

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello Jacques, hello Dave

Good afternoon, how are you?
I saw the chart. I like how it looks. I think it works.
How it continues?

Besos
Julieta

PS: I liked so much the Frank Lloyd Wright's handwriting. Look the "C" and the "G". So subtle.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/F98DE8F5-C9C4-4DAC-B665-8FF0FFFB49E8%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

> Good afternoon, how are you?
> I saw the chart. I like how it looks. I think it works.

Glad you like it :)


> How it continues?

I am now working on checking the combining accents. After that I will try to interpolate the smallcaps by using the new uppercase. So they will be the same as the uppercase. When that is done I am doing the punctuation, currencies etc. until all glyphs are corrected/checked.

Once all that is done, I will do a final spacing check and do the (new) kerning.

Once the Roman is done, I will take it as a base for the Italic, slant it and do the same optical corrections you have made on your Italic.

Best,
Jacques

[Jacques Le Bailly]

The last few days I have been reworking all combining accents of Montserrat. There were quite a few. I am almost done. :)

Making the combining accents work right is always a nice and big puzzle. Even in these tiny bits color and proportions are very important. I made them more geometric than they were to fit the rest.

A few samples of the old version:

Same sample with new ones. I added spacing just to be able to keep overview and consistance in anchor positioning. The added spacing will have no effect on the combined characters.

Best,

Jacques

[juandelperal]

Hi Jacques

Thank you very much for all your work in this Montserrat improvement. Do you have a public repo where we can check the sources? It would be very helpful.

I have some suggestions to make:

I like the more geometric feeling of the diacritics, but in my understanding I think that some vietnamese accents are misaligned (red), some feel a bit light (cyan), and some maybe are now a bit wide and will collide with other letters. It would be great to test it in real words (or having the font files).

Could you please send a screenshot of ị? I think the dotbelowcomb you did is really small.

There are good tips on Donny Trương's https://vietnamesetypography.com

The normal w is too wide, specially in black, in both cases, but more in lowercases

The new proportions in the alternates w feels strange to me. Narrower in uppercase and wider in lowercase?

M and W altenate thin too narrow

Thanks again for your work. I hope this helps.

Best,

Juan

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Juan,

Thank you very much for all your work in this Montserrat improvement. Do you have a public repo where we can check the sources? It would be very helpful.

I do, yes. https://github.com/Fonthausen/Montserrat

I have some suggestions to make:

I like the more geometric feeling of the diacritics, but in my understanding I think that some vietnamese accents are misaligned (red),

Both accents with Macron were originally in the font and I kept them for legacy, but they aren’t used by any composed character.

some feel a bit light (cyan), and some maybe are now a bit wide and will collide with other letters.

I could make the Circumflex a little heavier, if needed. The alignment is the official Vietnamese way. Don’t forget several characters have become wider in the Black as well.

It would be great to test it in real words (or having the font files).

Could you please send a screenshot of ị? I think the dotbelowcomb you did is really small.

I made the dotaccent a little smaller to reduce the bounding box. The dotbelow is often smaller than dotaccent. I have added or changed the kerning yet. Please notice I added a dotaccent.i The dot is larger and has another vertical position than the default one.

I send you a screenshot of  /ị/? but I have worked on the question mark yet and I made the period larger, so now it looks weird. :)

There are good tips on Donny Trương's https://vietnamesetypography.com

I know, some of my work is stated as samples :)

The normal w is too wide, specially in black, in both cases, but more in lowercases

I do not agree. I tried to enhance the geometric character of the font by reviewing the proportions and lowering the contrast. If I would narrow down the w, the contrast will become too high and the proportion to narrow. IMHO.

The new proportions in the alternates w feels strange to me. Narrower in uppercase and wider in lowercase?

M and W altenate thin too narrow

I could make that wider if you want. Julia told me she thinks it is OK. Your call.

Did you have a look at the chart I have made to explain how I made the widths and proportions ?

Best,

Jacques

[Jacques Le Bailly]

The uppercase, the lowercase, the figures and combining accents of Montserrat now have been corrected and redrawn completely. 

The new uppercase will be interpolated to make the smallcaps. The corrections made in the uppercase will now automatically be transferred to the smallcaps. The new figures will be interpolated to create the inferior and superior numbers.

After final corrections on the new smallcaps and inferior and superior numbers, the punctuation and currency signs will be reviewed.

Then the master can be kerned.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

GIF isn't working.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello, good afternoon!

Thank you Jacques for the numbers.

In a first view I like but some numbers I feel them a little bit wide.

I like 0, 1 and 2; 3, 4 and 5, a little bit wide (I would prefer not that wide...); 6 and 7 looks good (the end of the 6, on the top goes a little bit too down). The 8 looks a little bit extended, as a font extended... 

I understand the need of more air inside but may be touching some curves for avoid the hard corners.

I attach a PDF graphing this I say. Let me know what do you think.

Thank you!

Besos

Julieta

2017-08-14 12:11 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonth...@gmail.com>:

GIF isn't working.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/47ba8907-acca-4a61-b687-305e3c1dcf97%40googlegroups.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julia,

> In a first view I like but some numbers I feel them a little bit wide.
> I like 0, 1 and 2; 3, 4 and 5, a little bit wide (I would prefer not that wide...); 6 and 7 looks good (the end of the 6, on the top goes a little bit too down). The 8 looks a little bit extended, as a font extended...

Am I correct, you think 2-5 and 8 are too wide ? The 8 now has the same width as the zero. 2, 3 and 5 also have the same width.

I am now busy on the smallcaps. When I am done, I will correct the numbers like you described.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello Jacques,

It is only an observation... I will be more specific anyway.

I think the top line of the “3” can be a little bit short. May be the leftier vertex of the “4” can finish with a vertical line because I see that goes too wide (as goes in the black variant). I see the “8” a little bit extended, forced... may be I'm not right... is just an observation. I would like to read some other opinions... But, of course, It's your work and I respect absolutely what you are doing :)

Thanks!

Besos

Julieta

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/77638CB7-E96F-4A9C-8C2E-239811D7D9CC%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Number “2” is perfect!

2017-08-15 13:03 GMT-03:00 Julieta Ulanovsky <julieta....@gmail.com>:

Hello Jacques,

It is only an observation... I will be more specific anyway.

I think the top line of the “3” can be a little bit short. May be the leftier vertex of the “4” can finish with a vertical line because I see that goes too wide (as goes in the black variant). I see the “8” a little bit extended, forced... may be I'm not right... is just an observation. I would like to read some other opinions... But, of course, It's your work and I respect absolutely what you are doing :)

Thanks!

Besos

Julieta

2017-08-14 17:55 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonthausen@baronvonfonthausen.com>:

Hi Julia,

> In a first view I like but some numbers I feel them a little bit wide.
> I like 0, 1 and 2; 3, 4 and 5, a little bit wide (I would prefer not that wide...); 6 and 7 looks good (the end of the 6, on the top goes a little bit too down). The 8 looks a little bit extended, as a font extended...

Am I correct, you think 2-5 and 8 are too wide ? The 8 now has the same width as the zero. 2, 3 and 5 also have the same width.

I am now busy on the smallcaps. When I am done, I will correct the numbers like you described.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

>
> Hello Jacques,
> It is only an observation... I will be more specific anyway.
> I think the top line of the “3” can be a little bit short. May be the leftier vertex of the “4” can finish with a vertical line because I see that goes too wide (as goes in the black variant). I see the “8” a little bit extended, forced... may be I'm not right... is just an observation. I would like to read some other opinions... But, of course, It's your work and I respect absolutely what you are doing :)

It may be my work, but I am doing it also for you ! So you should be happy with it.

What I can do is to use the numbers I made for the lining tabular figures. For the proportional lining figures I will make more explicit numbers like you suggest. For example, an eight built by circles, a narrower three etc.

Best,
Jacques

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello Jacques

Yes! to see the numbers in actions will help me so much to see and evaluate the proportions. Tabulars are very graphics! Thank you!!!

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

Yes! to see the numbers in actions will help me so much to see and evaluate the proportions. Tabulars are very graphics! Thank you!!!

I made the default lining numbers a lot more narrow now, like you wanted. 

I added an elaborate proof with all lowercase, uppercase, smallcaps and numerals. Note: there is no kerning in the proof. But I think it already looks pretty neat. Much kerning will not be needed.

Best,

Jacques

[Jacques Le Bailly]

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello Jacques, good morning here

Thank you!

I will look everything carefully.

And go back asap.

Besos

Julieta

2017-08-18 7:21 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonth...@gmail.com>:

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/efe84f98-46c5-4689-955b-2e892326a412%40googlegroups.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Here is an overview of all 1,555 glyphs of both master weights. I have corrected all of them. I added a few sample texts in different languages.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

This week I have been working on the kerning of the Black master. To be honest, I expected it to be able to finish that earlier. But the sheer amount of different glyphs (default, smallcaps, lining & oldstyle figures, .case & .sc punctuation etc. etc.) made it a larger job as expected.

The following kerning has been added:

UC-UC
UC-LC
LC-LC
SC-SC
UC-SC

num-num
UL-num
num-UC
LC-num
num-LC

UC-#
#-UC
LC-#
#-LC
SC-#
#-SC

num-#
#-num

$-num
num-$
$-#
#-$

+ check for exceptions

UC=uppercase (+alternates)
LC=lowercase (+alternates)
SC=smallcaps (+alternates)
num=oldstyle+lining figures
#=punctuation (+case +sc)
$=currency signs


This proof contains al standard letter-letter num-num etc. combinations. At the end of the proofs you will find kerning words and foreign languages.

[Dave Crossland]

Monster! Amazing work

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/F1D3EB91-0991-48DE-8C30-D5428A062B7D%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

This is the same proof with stylistic alternates.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/F1D3EB91-0991-48DE-8C30-D5428A062B7D%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

This a PDF exported from Glyphs with all the kerning pairs.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/F1D3EB91-0991-48DE-8C30-D5428A062B7D%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hello, good morning here!

Absolutely awesome.

I appreciate so much the cleaning and the clarity in the presentations. It´s a pleasure to see the changes this way.

I like very much how it looks: so strong!

Monster! Amazing work

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/F1D3EB91-0991-48DE-8C30-D5428A062B7D%40baronvonfonthausen.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



This is the same proof with stylistic alternates.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/F1D3EB91-0991-48DE-8C30-D5428A062B7D%40baronvonfonthausen.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



This a PDF exported from Glyphs with all the kerning pairs.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/F1D3EB91-0991-48DE-8C30-D5428A062B7D%40baronvonfonthausen.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/CAEozd0wdTodcUjt51xS6_-UeJk8yi_MaU0fBpYYno4qv3q%3DjcQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Thomas Linard]

I hadn't yet had the opportunity to say so, but I read the whole thread with great interest. It's a very subtle, very good job. Keep going!

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

:)

2017-09-06 12:30 GMT-03:00 Thomas Linard <thli...@gmail.com>:

I hadn't yet had the opportunity to say so, but I read the whole thread with great interest. It's a very subtle, very good job. Keep going!

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/db429058-f676-47ac-a713-07a5213e62c8%40googlegroups.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Thomas,

> I hadn't yet had the opportunity to say so, but I read the whole thread with great interest. It's a very subtle, very good job. Keep going!

👍

:)

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi All,
I finished the kerning of the Thin master and corrected some kerning of the Black master.

Here is a proof with the default characters (no alternates).

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Here is the Thin master proof with alternates.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Here is the Black master proof with the default characters (no alternates).

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Here is the Black master proof with alternates.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

In the original Files a custom parameter (InterpolationWeightY) to add more weight vertically. I took this out now. I will make some prints too
see if this is still necessary.

Julieta,
maybe you can have a look at this proof with all Roman instances ? Can you judge if it is still necessary to add vertical weight ?

[Jacques Le Bailly]

I generated an intermediate Medium weight.

Here is the proof with the default characters (no alternates).

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Here is the Medium proof with the alternates.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

I had a look at the weights. In the Original the weights developed in pretty much equal numerical steps. There was one jump bigger than the others, from Regular to Medium (plus 35 instead of plus ≈24). I made a proof document where the original is compared to two other solutions.

Top is the original. In the middle I tried to mimick the original as good as possible and taking out the big jump in the middle. (name = Test)

On the bottom I applied Pablo Impallari’s weight theory. (name = Imp)

Pablo’s theory is based on optical difference, Julieta’s is more “mathematical”. If it where up to me, I would do something halfway between Julieta’s and Pablo’s. Pablo’s and my solution would end in some significant differences in the weights as used until now. I asked Dave Crossland what he would advise.

Note, I did add vertical weight (weightClass parameter) like Julieta originally did. The differences were too obvious.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Here is the more elaborate proof. This PDF has been generated with hints.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta and team members,
Maybe you would like to have a look at the weights ? What would your opinion be on this ?

Changing the weight might create a small discussion from the users, but in the long run I think distributing the weights more like Impallari’s results (or similar) are typographically more useful.

[Juan Pablo del Peral]

I like the weight distribution that you propose in the second line: Test

Thanks!

j.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/googlefonts-discuss/NYFQk_u1uPg/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/08FB789B-62B7-43C6-AF02-A667F1EFEF55%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Thomas Linard]

Hi Jacques,

I prefer the Pablo distribution (already a refined version of the Luc(as) distribution).

I understand your concerns to try to mimic the original as good as possible, but I know in my teams some people already using Montserrat v6, and any change whatsoever, even the slightest, would prove to be problematic. So, anyway we'll have to deal with a new version.

[Dave Crossland]

For me, if we change it, we should not compromise but make sure it is the best: the future is longer than the past, and even though Montserrat is already quite popular, it will only become more popular if it is better. So we should not be afraid to change anything if the change is an improvement. 

I also know that "thin is in" and light weights are much more used than heavier ones. So for me the impallari steps are the best and I would be happy to see them used in the next update. 

This is somewhat a minor concern since a Variable Font format version with a weight axes will mean users can pick whatever they like. 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/c940e3c9-0f70-4b8e-b518-db8e0f187771%40googlegroups.com.

[Juan Pablo del Peral]

I agree! 

I think that would be better to have another view of the distribution.

Here I am attaching a pdf and an editable idml for seeing all the weights working in paragraphs.

Jacques, could you please edit this document adding the new options, so we can compare better the progression of each weight and the three regulars?

Beyond the Pablo recommendation, I think that the regular weight has to be set manually, and then make intermediate steps to the extremes, maybe using the Pablo's approach.

Thanks

2017-09-13 9:32 GMT-03:00 Dave Crossland <da...@lab6.com>:

For me, if we change it, we should not compromise but make sure it is the best: the future is longer than the past, and even though Montserrat is already quite popular, it will only become more popular if it is better. So we should not be afraid to change anything if the change is an improvement. 

I also know that "thin is in" and light weights are much more used than heavier ones. So for me the impallari steps are the best and I would be happy to see them used in the next update. 

This is somewhat a minor concern since a Variable Font format version with a weight axes will mean users can pick whatever they like. 

On Sep 13, 2017 5:20 AM, "Thomas Linard" <thli...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Jacques,

I prefer the Pablo distribution (already a refined version of the Luc(as) distribution).

I understand your concerns to try to mimic the original as good as possible, but I know in my teams some people already using Montserrat v6, and any change whatsoever, even the slightest, would prove to be problematic. So, anyway we'll have to deal with a new version.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/c940e3c9-0f70-4b8e-b518-db8e0f187771%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/googlefonts-discuss/NYFQk_u1uPg/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/CAEozd0xv2%2BXKpq%3DUho8WmXQfxx0S5%2B4w-wTx4J1BKatdi_9AvA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Juan,
here is what you requested. :)

On the weight scale of 20-215, in the original Montserrat Regular is 90. In mine Regular it is 92 and in Impallari 65. (In Impallari’s table, the Medium is 92).

I agree with Dave and Thomas. The only thing is that because we have nine weights, the Regular becomes quite Light when we use Impallari’s table. Maybe we could try to find a middle way ? Or try to see if going past the Black Master (>215) would help ?

[Juan Pablo del Peral]

Great, thanks Jacques!

I prefer your distribution.

The Impallari scale gives us a 400 that looks like a 300 or so.

Is true that the progression get slower in the bolder weights but this is because we had to fill 9 weights. To achieve a more even distribution would be better to have 8 weights instead of 9, but we have not choice for doing that now.

Thanks!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/googlefonts-discuss/NYFQk_u1uPg/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/BAFBC720-7A68-4CEF-8BAB-61A76E969D95%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/googlefonts-discuss/NYFQk_u1uPg/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/BAFBC720-7A68-4CEF-8BAB-61A76E969D95%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

I made a quick test. The maximum superblack (>215) without any rework would be around 236.

This would give a Regular with 69 with Impallari.

Great, thanks Jacques!

I prefer your distribution.

The Impallari scale gives us a 400 that looks like a 300 or so.

Is true that the progression get slower in the bolder weights but this is because we had to fill 9 weights. To achieve a more even distribution would be better to have 8 weights instead of 9, but we have not choice for doing that now.

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Hi Jacques,

Thanks for trying to find a new solution for this issue.

I like the weight distribution that you proposed in the PDF (Montserrat Jacques).


We find that the extrapolated version is not working and it will need many improvements.

We suggest to leave Montserrat Jacques or make two Impallari progressions:

20-92 and 92-215

Besos

Julieta

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/B11805C3-EA7C-456F-B745-875510D588AC%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi Julieta,

It was just a test :)

I will try some more without extrapolations as you suggested

Verzonden door TypeApp

Op 13 sep. 2017, om 17:36, Julieta Ulanovsky <julieta....@gmail.com> schreef:

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

Great!

Thank you :)

2017-09-13 12:54 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonthausen@baronvonfonthausen.com>:

Hi Julieta,

It was just a test :)

I will try some more without extrapolations as you suggested

Verzonden door TypeApp

Op 13 sep. 2017, om 17:36, Julieta Ulanovsky <julieta....@gmail.com> schreef:

Hi Jacques,

Thanks for trying to find a new solution for this issue.

I like the weight distribution that you proposed in the PDF (Montserrat Jacques).


We find that the extrapolated version is not working and it will need many improvements.

We suggest to leave Montserrat Jacques or make two Impallari progressions:

20-92 and 92-215

Besos

Julieta

2017-09-13 11:54 GMT-03:00 Jacques Le Bailly <fonthausen@baronvonfonthausen.com>:

I made a quick test. The maximum superblack (>215) without any rework would be around 236.

This would give a Regular with 69 with Impallari.

Great, thanks Jacques!

I prefer your distribution.

The Impallari scale gives us a 400 that looks like a 300 or so.

Is true that the progression get slower in the bolder weights but this is because we had to fill 9 weights. To achieve a more even distribution would be better to have 8 weights instead of 9, but we have not choice for doing that now.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/B11805C3-EA7C-456F-B745-875510D588AC%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/a62cf16c-a7b6-4522-913c-8af92fc79b1b%40baronvonfonthausen.com.

[Dave Crossland]

It would be nice indeed if the new Medium is the weight of the old Regular. Then for people who complain about the new Regular, they can just switch to Medium and be happy 

[Juan Pablo del Peral]

Yes, that would be great.

Version 5.002 has a regular (weight 110) that match the weight of the version v2.001.

It is all in https://github.com/JulietaUla/Montserrat/releases

2017-09-13 13:53 GMT-03:00 Dave Crossland <da...@lab6.com>:

It would be nice indeed if the new Medium is the weight of the old Regular. Then for people who complain about the new Regular, they can just switch to Medium and be happy 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/googlefonts-discuss/NYFQk_u1uPg/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/CAEozd0y6n2bYLrc5hYf3TDHVPE3iwy6KmWsiROHDf4-y%3DezbYw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

This is how the differences now look in a graph.

If we would use the Impallari steps, the intermediate weights would be shifting by one place. This could be well documented and explained to the (old) users.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

It has been a while since I published my work on Montserrat. But here are the last versions.
Basically, two things have been done.
– First, I made the Italics.
– And second, after some discussion, we decided to add an SemiBold intermediate master to keep the contrast as low as possible, as heavy as possible. The intermediate SemiBold master is now located in the middle of the weight axis.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

I finished the new intermediate Italic SemiBold master. Here is the latest proof.

In the Roman and the Italic all the glyphs were checked and corrected were needed, due to interpolating errors. The combining accents are now slightly heavier. The dots ( dot accent, dieresis etc.) were made a little bit lore round. I noticed they were too oval too my likings. The ogonek and cedilla are now heavier and the horn was made a little bit thinner to fit the rest.

Like in the Roman, the contrast was lowered in the new intermediate Italic SemiBold master.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

We had a chat on Slack on the weight distribution. Until now we used the Impallari numbers. Due to the newly corrections, the lighter weights looked too similar. So I made a new chart and weight distribution to make the differences more obvious.

I added a screen dump of the graph to show the differences between the new numbers and the Impallari’s.

[Jacques Le Bailly]

I just uploaded the latest files with corrected instances etc. You can find it on my Git (https://github.com/Fonthausen/Montserrat).

My part is finished now. Sol, Juan and others are now continuing with the Cyrillic. You can follow their thread on https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/googlefonts-discuss/3P5U6kSDjIk

Best regards,

Jacques

Some extra info on Montserrat.

Vertical and Horizontal stems: HOno

In version Montserrat_jlb_43 and up weight was added to the round strokes, as suggested by Sol and Juan. First focus was on the lowercase and numerals. After some testing, there was no need to add weight to the uppercase and smallcaps. Globally the lowercase got +6 units, the numerals +4. Offcourse locally this might differ.

The new intermediate master has been set at 110, near to middle of the complete weight axis (226/2=113). Before adding the new axis all Brace layers were taken out. The optical correction that used to be in the Brace layers are now in the new intermediate master. The instance was genarated an InterpolationWeightY value of +10. Afterwards all glyphs were corrected where needed.

Lables: 

– Pink; Brace or Bracket layer.

– Blue; Built with components. 

– Orange; Original, unchanged.

– Brown; Used to be a Bracket or Brace layer. Now intermediate master is corrected. No Bracket or Brace layer anymore.

This info can also be found in the notes tab of the font info.

[Thomas Linard]

Hi Jacques,

Fantastic! You did a very impressive job. The new weight distribution, the kerning, and the subtle glyphs correction… You have shown great mastery.

Do you know if the intent is to release a version 7 with your work, or wait for the Cyrillic part to be finished?

[Dave Crossland]

Hi

I am hoping Cyrillic will be done soon :) 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/2f5f4803-db69-4ec7-ab72-343d131a1b2d%40googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Cheers
Dave

[SOL MATAS]

Hi everyone!

Attached you can find a .pdf with the recent work of our cyrillic extension for Montserrat.

Now we have merged the latest version of the latin family redesigned by Jacques Le Bailly and added a third master in cyrillic.

We have completed the cyrillic character set and added its alternates.

During the last weeks we were working with Maria Doreuli, who helped us to improve our cyrillic´s sketches.

About the Alternates glyphs:

We are reusing most of the latin alternates for the cyrillic, but we are not sure about the alternates for У and Ү, because we are replacing both characters with the same glyph (Y.ss01).
Since some languages –kazakh, mongolian, buryat, bashkir and maybe more– use both characters (У and Ү), we wonder which of them we have to keep or if it’s better to avoid alternates in both cases in order to prevent any confusion.

If you see something else to improve the cyrillic´s alternates please let us know.

Todos

• We are still working in kerning.
• The italics.
• Final checks and mastering

The sources are available and updated in the branch:

https://github.com/JulietaUla/Montserrat/tree/cyrillic

Cheers,

Juan and Sol

[Alexei Vanyashin]

Hi Sol, 

My review will follow in the next e-mail.

[Alexei Vanyashin]

• About the Alternates glyphs:
  
• We are reusing most of the latin alternates for the cyrillic, but we are not sure about the alternates for У and Ү, because we are replacing both characters with the same glyph (Y.ss01). 
  
• Since some languages –kazakh, mongolian, buryat, bashkir and maybe more– use both characters (У and Ү), we wonder which of them we have to keep or if it’s better to avoid alternates in both cases in order to prevent any confusion.
  
• If you see something else to improve the cyrillic´s alternates please let us know.
  

I think the alternate design of U+04B1 ұ ustraitstroke-cy is confusing, and doesn't cooperate with the default lowercase glyph which has no matching alternative.

Can you try this shape:

• These glyphs are obsolete, and were removed from GF Cyrillic sets, it is same to delete them:
  

U+04A6 Ҧ Pemiddlehook-cy

U+04A7 ҧ pemiddlehook-cy

• u+04FB ӻ gestrokehook-cy 
  

I recommend using a similar descender base as in gedescender

• U+046A Ѫ Big Yus 

Stay closer to its historical representation:

• U+04FD Ӽ hahook-cy

Bottom stroke in X may be more coherent with U+04C3 Ӄ Kahook

References:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/googlefonts-discuss/NYFQk_u1uPg/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/16de0e24-e974-45fa-a247-5cc168d9cf4e%40googlegroups.com.

[SOL]

Thanks Alexei!

We received your suggestions and will be working on that today.
Cheers,
Sol

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/16de0e24-e974-45fa-a247-5cc168d9cf4e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/CADUrt2HPwPu_Es_bbzqJ1eNZ2VQvwwuhq5OwEWit1r2d5GC1DQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[SOL]

Hi Alexei,
we have one doubt (attached you can find an image to illustrate it).

Thanks!
Sol

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/16de0e24-e974-45fa-a247-5cc168d9cf4e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

[Juan Pablo del Peral]

Hi team :)

He have 2 technical questions:

Naming

The new regular is the 500. Do we have to change the naming of the variables?

Something like: (old/new)

Naming

Also does the weight class must change like this?

Before 250 275 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

After  250 275 300 350 400 600 700 800 900

What is the best approach for this?

We are wondering if this would help for automatic switching to the new regular (in desktop environments).

Please let me know if the question is clear.

Thanks!

j.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/CANs3mNR861kjD-WBZxmEsu_UUKw15%3DGpUyoWPfh49z9zuHM-DQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dave Crossland]

Hi

On 25 October 2017 at 17:14, Juan Pablo del Peral <juande...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi team :)

He have 2 technical questions:

Naming

The new regular is the 500.

That's not possible =) A "SemiLight" is not a valid style within CSS or Google Fonts; there are only 9 weights possible per family, and the Regular must be 400 and the Bold must be 700. 

 

Do we have to change the naming of the variables?

Something like: (old/new)

The old set is named and ordered correctly. 

I am okay with changing the Regular's design to be lighter than before; the current Montserrat Regular we serve is too dark for long-form text. 

 

Naming

Also does the weight class must change like this?

Before 250 275 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

After  250 275 300 350 400 600 700 800 900

Yes, the Before is a hard requirement; the After is not allowed.  

What is the best approach for this?

We are wondering if this would help for automatic switching to the new regular (in desktop environments).

Google Fonts is focused primarily on the web; the fact the fonts can be installed and used in desktop environments is fine, but when web and desktop are in conflict and no compromise is possible, web wins. However in this case the compromise is perfectly possible :) 

Cheers
Dave 

[Juan Pablo del Peral]

OK!

Perfect, so leaving as it is now will be fine.

Thanks

j.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/googlefonts-discuss/NYFQk_u1uPg/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/CAEozd0xbBPXNB-R1Qi_1Sxy5f5NcTtktTNKMWXXL0CGtcAsw6w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Alexei Vanyashin]

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:59 PM SOL <solm...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Alexei,
we have one doubt (attached you can find an image to illustrate it).

Thanks!
Sol

2017-10-24 11:08 GMT+02:00 SOL <solm...@gmail.com>:

Thanks Alexei!

We received your suggestions and will be working on that today.
Cheers,
Sol

2017-10-24 9:37 GMT+02:00 Alexei Vanyashin <a...@cyreal.org>:

• About the Alternates glyphs:
  
• We are reusing most of the latin alternates for the cyrillic, but we are not sure about the alternates for У and Ү, because we are replacing both characters with the same glyph (Y.ss01). 
  
• Since some languages –kazakh, mongolian, buryat, bashkir and maybe more– use both characters (У and Ү), we wonder which of them we have to keep or if it’s better to avoid alternates in both cases in order to prevent any confusion.
  
• If you see something else to improve the cyrillic´s alternates please let us know.
  

I think the alternate design of U+04B1 ұ ustraitstroke-cy is confusing, and doesn't cooperate with the default lowercase glyph which has no matching alternative.

I see two options here,

Option 1. Remove Ustrait-cy.ss01, Ustraitstroke-cy.ss01, and forget about the problem.

You don't have to use alternates in every possible place.

Option 2. Make both upper- and lowercase alternates(Ustrait-cy.ss01, Ustraitstroke-cy.ss01,ustrait-cy.ss01, ustraitstroke-cy.ss01) based on my suggested shape.

Anther question about Л.ss01: since upper and lower-case Л,л share the same construction (as is the case with the other 26 matching Cyrillic glyphs Вв, Дд, Яя, Мм, etc.) it would make sense to have a matching lowercase alternate too.

 Here is your line-up of base alternative glyphs (ss01):

These lowercase glyphs aren't a good match for their UC equivalents:

for д and т perhaps you may use the BGR alternative, i.e. de-cy.loclBGR=de-cy.ss01, te-cy.loclBGR=te-cy.ss01

Also, I think these alternates are unnecessary: Eldescender-cy.ss01, Eltail-cy.ss01. The base shape may be mistaken for П because of the symmetry.

It's fine to drop these alternates and stick to just the ones that work flawlessly.

 

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/16de0e24-e974-45fa-a247-5cc168d9cf4e%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/CADUrt2HPwPu_Es_bbzqJ1eNZ2VQvwwuhq5OwEWit1r2d5GC1DQ%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/googlefonts-discuss/NYFQk_u1uPg/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to googlefonts-dis...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefon...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/CANs3mNR861kjD-WBZxmEsu_UUKw15%3DGpUyoWPfh49z9zuHM-DQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Alexei Vanyashin]

I also thought about this in ѣ /yat-cy.ss01, but perhaps it's just too much.

[SOL MATAS]

Hi Alexei,

Thank you very much for your feedback. 

We will look over your suggestions and be back to you in case we have more questions.

Thanks again,

Sol

.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*

Sol Matas
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

HUERTA TIPOGRÁFICA

s...@huertatipografica.com

huertatipografica.com

facebook.com/huertatipo

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Lausitzerstr. 10, Aufgang C, Einheit sieben

Etage 3, 10999, Berlin

T. (++49) 174 4101524

On Oct 26, 2017, at 9:21 AM, Alexei Vanyashin <a...@cyreal.org> wrote:

I also thought about this in ѣ /yat-cy.ss01, but perhaps it's just too much.

<Screen Shot 2017-10-26 at 11.19.23 AM.png>

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:15 AM Alexei Vanyashin <a...@cyreal.org> wrote:

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:59 PM SOL <solm...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Alexei,
we have one doubt (attached you can find an image to illustrate it).

Thanks!
Sol

2017-10-24 11:08 GMT+02:00 SOL <solm...@gmail.com>:

Thanks Alexei!

We received your suggestions and will be working on that today.
Cheers,
Sol

2017-10-24 9:37 GMT+02:00 Alexei Vanyashin <a...@cyreal.org>:

• About the Alternates glyphs:
  
• We are reusing most of the latin alternates for the cyrillic, but we are not sure about the alternates for У and Ү, because we are replacing both characters with the same glyph (Y.ss01). 
  
• Since some languages –kazakh, mongolian, buryat, bashkir and maybe more– use both characters (У and Ү), we wonder which of them we have to keep or if it’s better to avoid alternates in both cases in order to prevent any confusion.
  
• If you see something else to improve the cyrillic´s alternates please let us know.
  

I think the alternate design of U+04B1 ұ ustraitstroke-cy is confusing, and doesn't cooperate with the default lowercase glyph which has no matching alternative.

<Screen Shot 2017-10-24 at 11.33.55 AM.png>

I see two options here,

Option 1. Remove Ustrait-cy.ss01, Ustraitstroke-cy.ss01, and forget about the problem.

You don't have to use alternates in every possible place.

Option 2. Make both upper- and lowercase alternates(Ustrait-cy.ss01, Ustraitstroke-cy.ss01,ustrait-cy.ss01, ustraitstroke-cy.ss01) based on my suggested shape.

Anther question about Л.ss01: since upper and lower-case Л,л share the same construction (as is the case with the other 26 matching Cyrillic glyphs Вв, Дд, Яя, Мм, etc.) it would make sense to have a matching lowercase alternate too.

<Screen Shot 2017-10-26 at 11.11.35 AM.png>

 Here is your line-up of base alternative glyphs (ss01):

<Screen Shot 2017-10-26 at 11.04.41 AM.png>

These lowercase glyphs aren't a good match for their UC equivalents:

<Screen Shot 2017-10-26 at 11.06.29 AM.png>

for д and т perhaps you may use the BGR alternative, i.e. de-cy.loclBGR=de-cy.ss01, te-cy.loclBGR=te-cy.ss01

<Screen Shot 2017-10-26 at 11.07.10 AM.png>

Also, I think these alternates are unnecessary: Eldescender-cy.ss01, Eltail-cy.ss01. The base shape may be mistaken for П because of the symmetry.

It's fine to drop these alternates and stick to just the ones that work flawlessly.

<Screen Shot 2017-10-26 at 10.55.33 AM.png>

Can you try this shape:

<Screen Shot 2017-10-23 at 9.32.27 PM.png>

• These glyphs are obsolete, and were removed from GF Cyrillic sets, it is same to delete them:
  

U+04A6 Ҧ Pemiddlehook-cy

U+04A7 ҧ pemiddlehook-cy

• u+04FB ӻ gestrokehook-cy 
  

I recommend using a similar descender base as in gedescender

<Screen Shot 2017-10-24 at 10.19.00 AM.png>

• U+046A Ѫ Big Yus 

<Screen Shot 2017-10-24 at 10.21.46 AM.png>

Stay closer to its historical representation:

<Screen Shot 2017-10-24 at 10.22.40 AM.png>

• U+04FD Ӽ hahook-cy

Bottom stroke in X may be more coherent with U+04C3 Ӄ Kahook

<Screen Shot 2017-10-24 at 10.20.16 AM.png>

References:

<Screen Shot 2017-10-24 at 11.30.17 AM.png>

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/CADUrt2HUY_27Z%3DwMQdpm%2BrnEY1Ho-H1VnNOpZttiAsY8VQd%2BVw%40mail.gmail.com.

[SOL]

 

Hi Alexei!

Thank you very much for your feedback.

You can find some comments bellow: (in blue)

 

Option 1. Remove Ustrait-cy.ss01, Ustraitstroke-cy.ss01, and forget about the problem.

You don't have to use alternates in every possible place.

We agree, we decided to delete them. 

Anther question about Л.ss01: since upper and lower-case Л,л share the same construction (as is the case with the other 26 matching Cyrillic glyphs Вв, Дд, Яя, Мм, etc.) it would make sense to have a matching lowercase alternate too.

About the Alternates, we would like to point out that not all the cases in Latin

both uppercase and lowercase have alternates. It is something more randomly as you can see here:

 

 Maria Doreuli said that In the uppercase Л Д are supported by A.ss01 and it's better to keep traditional letter shapes in lowercase.

for д and т perhaps you may use the BGR alternative, i.e. de-cy.loclBGR=de-cy.ss01, te-cy.loclBGR=te-cy.ss01

Agree! 

Also, I think these alternates are unnecessary: Eldescender-cy.ss01, Eltail-cy.ss01. The base shape may be mistaken for П because of the symmetry.

It's fine to drop these alternates and stick to just the ones that work flawlessly.

We agree, we decided to delete them.  

I also thought about this in ѣ /yat-cy.ss01, but perhaps it's just too much.

We agree, they look quirky.  Thanks again, Juan and Sol.

[Alexei Vanyashin]

About the Alternates, we would like to point out that not all the cases in Latin

both uppercase and lowercase have alternates. It is something more randomly as you can see here:

 

 Maria Doreuli said that In the uppercase Л Д are supported by A.ss01 and it's better to keep traditional letter shapes in lowercase.

Hi Sol, Juan, 

Thank you for the explanation. That is fine. I don't have any more comments.

I think you all did an excellent job with Maria on the Cyrillic, my congratulations.

 

[juandelperal]

Hi everybody!
We are happy to announce that we have done the cyrillic extension for the new Montserrat.
We closed the cyrillic branch and merged into the master. We didn’t added the tag/release to the repo until all is revised and OK.
https://github.com/JulietaUla/Montserrat/

We would like to say thanks to Jacques Le Bailly, Maria Doreuli, Marc Foley, Alexei Vanyashin, and all the team.

Cheers,
Sol and Juan

[Julieta Ulanovsky]

AWESOME!

Thank you Juan and Sol!!!

Thank you Jacques LeBailly, Alexei Vanyashin, Marc Foley, 

Thank you Dave!

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/f4126afb-6084-43c9-9952-93cb19be80e2%40googlegroups.com.

[Dave Crossland]

Thanks Juan!

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Fonts Discussions" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to googlefonts-discuss+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to googlefonts-discuss@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/googlefonts-discuss.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/googlefonts-discuss/f4126afb-6084-43c9-9952-93cb19be80e2%40googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Cheers
Dave

[Jacques Le Bailly]

Hi all!

Congratulations on finishing the project !!! I wish to thank all of you for letting me help you in this very nice project.

Thank you very much for the cooperation ! Working together made the project strong !

Best regards,
Jacques

[Nikolaus Waxweiler]

Hi,
I don't see Jacques' work in the repo. Does it have to be merged still?