I think the kerning is too tight but other than that not too bad. As for the font itself, it has both a mechanical and rustic charm to it with the 'R' with the small bowl and the 'C' with its asymmetric terminals and the ascenders with diagonal cuts like Interstate. I believe the 'C' is a bit heavier than the 'O' but I'm not sure whether I mind. Those slight imperfections is what gives the font its rustic charm. I think you're really on to something with this.
It's not quite there yet though. Everything should be streamlined a bit to look the same. For example, the n, m and h are too narrow and almost look like they belong to Meta while the 'e' looks more like Helvetica.
I love it already. Maybe it's because of the bad kerning this font has something cheecky or playfull (i dont know the right word to explain in english...)
Your individual characters are beautifull and they work well togheter. like the t and i.. I might consider to give the capitals the same weight as the regular characters.
Just polish the damn thing and i am ready to purchase it D
Its really good, all i would say the capital 'R' looks a bit funny, i think its because the crossbar is higher than the one on the capital 'A' also maybe make the 'R' a bit wider? Also the question marks width at the bottom is different, maybe make the whole thing just one width because the rest of the font is, it would tie in better then.
It's not quite there yet though. Everything should be streamlined a bit to look the same. For example, the n, m and h are too narrow and almost look like they belong to Meta while the 'e' looks more like Helvetica.
--
#Temple-of-Typefaces – Quality typeface territory
Your individual characters are beautifull and they work well togheter. like the t and i..
I might consider to give the capitals the same weight as the regular characters.
Just polish the damn thing and i am ready to purchase it
--