Lowercase letter comparison

[vv-monsalve]

Hi @octaviopardo, Based on the PDF review of the most crucial glyph changes, I've created some comparison GIFs in which the before and after were superimposed to perceive better and evaluate the changes.

PDF source: letras en contexto.pdf

While doing this exercise, some other glyph changes become evident, so it's good to review them all at once in context.

c, e, f

• f keeping the new design
• c and e: Octavio opts to make slight adjustments to the New/Old c, e in lighter weights but keeping the new in the black (agree)
• n, m, h: Please check the joins, look smoother in the old
• g relieved lower opening looks better
• y counter relieved
• z color distribution improved
• k strokes weight distribution improved

[vv-monsalve]

o, c, s

• o and s: Octavio opts to keep the old version. I suggest to make slight adjustments to the New/Old
• If c and e are reviewed (above comment), o and s needs to be consistent with them

[vv-monsalve]

f, g, c at XTRA=100

• f, g, c: Octavio wants to keep the new. Agreed
• t main stem is now more centered and shorter
• m is narrowed now and arches less flat
• Spacing needs to be balanced out. See e.g. discotheques, particularly th and ma
• Kerning would need a final revision e.g. ox

[vv-monsalve]

s, a.ss01, g.ss01

at XTRA=0

• s: Octavio wants to keep the old. I would keep the new but review after the changes performed in c (above comment
• a.ss01: Octavio opts to keep the old. Suggested slight adjustments of the New/Old. Aperture in new is better, but the glyph is probably getting too wide.
• g.ss01: Octavio wants to keep the old. I would keep the new, but check after modifying a

at XTRA=100

• a.ss01 and g.ss01: Octavio opts to keep the new. Suggestion to review the a width; looks a bit wide.
• Spacing needs to be balanced out