• leadore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Looks good, just need to work on a few minor things:

    All of the ascenders and descenders (lines that extend above and below) need to be longer, especially on the f, d and the p. Also make sure the line on the right side of the a is clear and noticeable, it looks a lot like an o because you can hardly see that line. Overall the round parts of letters like a, d, g, p, etc are a little too wide/fat, so that combined with the vertical line parts being too short makes them look too similar to an o.

    That may sound like a lot of criticism, but overall it does look very good. It just takes a lot of words to try and describe these small issues.

  • then_three_more@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Super neat, extremely readable. On a few you can tell you’ve taken a long time forming the letters, so probably just need to practice until you can write at a useful speed, while keeping it as neat.

  • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I taught 3rd grade in the US, where kids are expected to have their printing correct and start to learn cursive. I’d say your writing is very neat and readable. It has some differences that most US adults develop when they’ve gotten used to cursive and then need to use printing. So nobody is going to have any trouble with reading this.

    For instance, when little kids print, or US teachers teach it, the straight line on their e is horizontal. The stems on their a and m are straight and well-defined. Their v has a sharp point. Their f is tall, with a strong top hook and nothing below the sitting line. Their y and x made from two straight diagonal lines. And there’s no slant. But after writing in cursive for awhile, many adults form their printing similarly to you.

    The only thing I’d suggest you change is to make the top part of the f stronger and more hooked. That’s the one letter that might cause confusion, even though your t has a tail to differentiate it. Your assignment doesn’t include a q, but I suggest you be sure to curve or point its tail below the line in the opposite direction from the tail on your g.

    All in all, well done.

  • Hazel@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    6 hours ago

    It doesn’t really look like handwriting, it’s like you’re copying/designing a digital font 🤔

    Meaning it’s really nicely done!

  • remon@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    d, h, l, f and t could all be a bit taller. Same for the line downwards from p.

  • SethranKada@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    8 hours ago

    It’s pretty good, easier to read than most native speakers I’d say.

    If I had to give a critique, I’d say the letters are rather round, so it can be hard to tell an ‘a’ from an ‘o’, but most people develop quirks like that in English so it’s perfectly fine.

  • chocrates@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Firstly, your penmanship is great, better than mine as a native tech worker.

    For some actual feedback, your letter sizes for the same letters are a bit inconsistent. That just takes practice.

    You are writing at a bit of a slant. That is not wrong but not that common, at least in the states.

    You are trying to stay within the lines and that is causing you to change the shape of the letters if they are too large.

    Your f’s could use a bit more curve. They look a little close to a t.

    But seriously it looks great.

    • Sprinks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The slant in print writing I think stems from how curisve is (was?) taught in U.S elementary schools. I recall getting the very distinct advice to tilt my paper 45° for cursive writing and it ended up becoming a habit that carried over into my print writing.

  • Dharma Curious (he/him)@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I genuinely thought that was digital. It’s amazingly consistent, and extremely legible and readable. Good job!

    But because I thought it was digital for a second (and I just woke up), I didn’t realize it was a handwriting exercise, and was trying to figure out what this poem could possibly mean for a minute. Lmao

  • Dharma Curious (he/him)@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I genuinely thought that was digital. It’s amazingly consistent, and extremely legible and readable. Good job!

    But because I thought it was digital for a second (and I just woke up), I didn’t realize it was a handwriting exercise, and was trying to figure out what this poem could possibly mean for a minute. Lmao

  • Mugita Sokio@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 hours ago

    My analysis on that is, despite the legibility being something odd, I can tell you put in the effort to spell the words you’re using correctly. I can’t even blame you for wanting to do something like that.

    I take it you want some challenging words sometime soon?