Opinions for simple pixel font I made

[coder_07]

What you see here is the entire character set so far. Lowercase letters aren't finished, so most of them show up as the � character.
updated version with lowercase letters:

By the way, the above screenshot was made using Scratch's pen. Also, if anyone has name ideas then please tell me!

[tethrarxitet]

I love it.

[bh]

@coder_07

By the way, the above screenshot was made using Scratch's pen.

Are the letters represented as code (a block drawA, another one drawB, etc.), or as an array of pixels (with one procedure that takes an array of pixels and draws it)?

[coder_07]

By using pen I meant stamped, but this is actually part of a larger project that includes graphics using pen, so soon I'll implement something closer to what you said (But instead of directly drawing with pen, it will write to a list of pixels)
Also, when it's done I'll port it to Snap! and add some enhancements.
Edit: to answer your question, it just takes some text as input.

[bh]

@coder_07

Edit: to answer your question, it just takes some text as input.

No, I get that, but how does it know how to render a character?

[coder_07]

It has costumes that it stamps, for the graphics mode I'l likely just have a bunch of if-elses
Edit: I changed my mind, it will have a list with pixel data (represented in binary) of all the characters.

[ego-lay_atman-bay]

You'd be surprised at what people have done in scratch. There are pen font engines that can take a string of text, and write that in pen (no stamping), all using data in lists. The best part is, some of them even have external tools to import regular font files. They are really amazing, and you gotta search it up.

For creating simple font engines, especially with monospace characters as costumes, is pretty easy, as you can easily put all the data in lists (multiple lists in scratch is very commonly used as key / value pairs, since you can't put real lists in scratch (without a decode step anyway)).

[insert_user_name]

I'm not the biggest fan of using multiple lists, so when I'm on Scratch, I like to use a single list.
I'd multiply the wanted index by however many values a key is supposed to have, then to get a value, I'll add to that index.

[slate_technologies]

You absolutely need to publish a Text Engine Project using THIS font on Snap!. I need it.

[coder_07]

I made a π calculator project in scratch, so I just used snapinator to convert it (and, as a little bonus, I added the π and ≈ symbols.)
https://snap.berkeley.edu/snap/snap.html#present:Username=coder_07&ProjectName=PI%20calculator

[bh]

The colon and semicolon are too tall. The colon should be x-height, i.e., the same as most lowercase letters acemn:opqr etc. The semicolon is the same but with a descender; like that.

The double quote " is too wide. It looks like two separate apostrophes.

Shift-hyphen is _ , not ⎵ as you have it.

I wonder if the skinny characters would look less naked if instead of a single-pixel dot you used something like this: ✣ or ◆ or whatever you can make work. That would immediately change period and colon; you'd have to do some more design to make a good comma and semicolon. Similarly, apostrophe and double quote would benefit from widening: three times the current width for the top two scan lines, then the current width centered.

Monospace is a severe constraint for a font designer. If you make the characters too wide, then many punctuation characters plus lower case i look terrible; if too narrow, then capital W and @ are misshapen. I think your capital W would be improved if you made the middle vertical not as tall as the outside ones. Even lower case w might benefit from the same idea.

But your ? and & are great!

[ten_6044]

Interesting pixel font.

However, your old one has the Æ character. Now the new one doesn't have it.

Also:

1. Where's …?
2. Your @ sign is too small, just what bh said.

[coder_07]

@bh

The colon and semicolon are too tall. The colon should be x-height, i.e., the same as most lowercase letters acemn:opqr etc. The semicolon is the same but with a descender; like that.

The double quote " is too wide. It looks like two separate apostrophes.

Shift-hyphen is _ , not ⎵ as you have it.

Will fix those.

@bh

I wonder if the skinny characters would look less naked if instead of a single-pixel dot you used something like this: ✣ or ◆ or whatever you can make work. That would immediately change period and colon; you'd have to do some more design to make a good comma and semicolon. Similarly, apostrophe and double quote would benefit from widening: three times the current width for the top two scan lines, then the current width centered.

I don't quite understand, could you elaborate?

@bh

Monospace is a severe constraint for a font designer. If you make the characters too wide, then many punctuation characters plus lower case i look terrible; if too narrow, then capital W and @ are misshapen. I think your capital W would be improved if you made the middle vertical not as tall as the outside ones. Even lower case w might benefit from the same idea.

edit: Whoops i misread that. Will do.

@bh

But your ? and & are great!

Thanks!

@ten_6044

However, your old one has the Æ character. Now the new one doesn't have it.

The new one does have it, it just isn't in the showcase.

@ten_6044

• Where's …?

Ditto.

@ten_6044

1. Your @ sign is too small, just what bh said.

Again, pixel constraints.

[bh]

@coder_07

I don't quite understand, could you elaborate?

Instead of

+-----+
|     |
|     |
|  *  |
|     |
|  *  |
|     |
|     |
+-----+

for colon, try

+-----+
|  *  |
| *** |
|  *  |
|     |
|  *  |
| *** |
|  *  |
+-----+

or something. Whatever fits.

[coder_07]

The dots are 2x2 pixels already.

[bh]

@coder_07

The dots are 2x2 pixels already.

Yeah, that's why they look so square! I want them to look diamond instead. I mean, circular would be best of all, but you can't do that with low resolution pixels.

[coder_07]

like this?

[offtopic] I think the term "x-height" is kind of ironic, because x is usually used for horizontal width instead of vertical height. [/offtopic]

[bh]

@coder_07

like this?

Maybe, although those are skinnier lines. Maybe

  XX
  XX
XXXXXX
XXXXXX
  XX
  XX

although that looks wrong because the aspect ratio is wrong (taller than it is wide)

Or even try filling in the corners a little:

  XX
 ▮XX▮
XXXXXX
XXXXXX
 ▮XX▮
  XX

@coder_07

I think the term "x-height" is kind of ironic, because x is usually used for horizontal width instead of vertical height.

Yeah, I don't know why they picked "x-height" rather than "z-height" or whatever. "z-height" would be particularly easy to measure because of the horizontals top and bottom. But x-height is the official name. WIkipedia correctly points out that it couldn't be "o-height" because rounded letters stick out slightly above and/or below (depending on where the rounded bits are) x-height, because it turns out to look really weird if they don't.

I know a bit about typography because my high school (back in the Jurassic Period) had a letterpress print shop; we printed our own school newspaper. Way cool. It's also where I learned why powered paper cutters have two handles, one on each side. :~)

[coder_07]

How about this?

@bh

rounded letters stick out slightly above and/or below (depending on where the rounded bits are) x-height, because it turns out to look really weird if they don't.

That's interesting, i never noticed that.

I accidentally cut off the R from "rounded" in the quote and somehow ended up with this suggestion:

"pointeded" LOL

@bh

I know a bit about typography because my high school (back in the Jurassic Period) had a letterpress print shop; we printed our own school newspaper. Way cool. It's also where I learned why powered paper cutters have two handles, one on each side. :~)

Interesting.

[insert_user_name]

Maybe the @ could be taller, so it won't look so small.

This also reminds me of some GBA fonts, especially the uppercase letters. It is very "WarioWare inc."