Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [PPLetterpress] Damaged fonts?

Expand Messages
  • Peter Fraterdeus
    Hi Eric. Hmmmm... It s been a LONG time since I ve dealt with ATM and System 9 or below, but I know that font issues are among the most intractable... Not
    Message 1 of 8 , Feb 3, 2009
      Hi Eric.

      Hmmmm...

      It's been a LONG time since I've dealt with ATM and System 9 or below,
      but I know that font issues are among the most intractable...

      Not really sure what to suggest, other than Google "Mac os9 ATM font
      repair"

      there are a bunch of shareware/free/commercial utilities here, for
      instance...

      http://www.pure-mac.com/font.html#fontdoctor but most are for OS X and
      beyond.

      http://downloads.zdnet.com/Software/Graphic+Design+Software/Font+Tools

      I expect the fonts are fine, but there may well have been some
      difference in interpretation of some table between MT and Adobe, which
      was ignored in earlier versions of ATM, perhaps, but now becomes a
      showstopper.

      Wish I could be of more assistance!

      Cheers

      Peter

      On 3 Feb 2009, at 4:27 PM, parallel_imp wrote:

      > In System 9.1, using ATM Deluxe 4.6.1 for font management, many of
      > my faces from
      > Monotype are now reported as "Damaged" (Baskerville, Bell, Bulmer,
      > various Gill Sans, Van
      > Dijck, others). Even deleting the entire font list from ATM, and
      > reinstalling the offending
      > fonts from their original floppies, and re-adding all my fonts to
      > ATM, they are still reported
      > as damaged: some with bad outline fonts, some with bad FOND
      > resources, etc. This is
      > happening on two diferent 9600s with G3 upgrades.
      > So, do I take these fonts to be truly damaged, or is it some anti-
      > Monotype bias in ATM? I
      > had no problems with these same fonts in system 8 on the same
      > computers, when font
      > management was by Suitcase 2.1.4, and many faces were successfully
      > output to film.
      > --Eric Holub, SF

      Peter Fraterdeus
      Almost Free™ Business Cards from Exquisite Letterpress
      http://slowprint.com/almostfreelp

      New! SlowPrint Newsletter!
      Signup: http://tinyurl.com/slowprint
      Current: http://slowprint.com/slowprintnl
    • billousek
      Eric I believe the problem may lie in your ATM pref files. Were I in your shoes, I would try the following: First, rebuild your ATM pref files by deleting the
      Message 2 of 8 , Feb 4, 2009
        Eric
        I believe the problem may lie in your ATM pref files.

        Were I in your shoes, I would try the following:

        First, rebuild your ATM pref files by deleting the AFM file and the
        ATM pref file located in your system preferences (IIRC, it's been some
        time since I used System 9).

        If that doesn't work, disable ATM and install problem fonts manually,
        one at a time. If this works, your ATM should be reinstalled.

        Bill




        --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, "parallel_imp" <Megalonyx@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > In System 9.1, using ATM Deluxe 4.6.1 for font management, many of
        my faces from
        > Monotype are now reported as "Damaged" (Baskerville, Bell, Bulmer,
        various Gill Sans, Van
        > Dijck, others). Even deleting the entire font list from ATM, and
        reinstalling the offending
        > fonts from their original floppies, and re-adding all my fonts to
        ATM, they are still reported
        > as damaged: some with bad outline fonts, some with bad FOND
        resources, etc. This is
        > happening on two diferent 9600s with G3 upgrades.
        > So, do I take these fonts to be truly damaged, or is it some
        anti-Monotype bias in ATM? I
        > had no problems with these same fonts in system 8 on the same
        computers, when font
        > management was by Suitcase 2.1.4, and many faces were successfully
        output to film.
        > --Eric Holub, SF
        >
      • Bryan Hutcheson
        could it be that the fonts are just really old versions and the postscript isn t clean for your system 9 G3s ? (installed from floppies) fonts were notoriously
        Message 3 of 8 , Feb 4, 2009
          could it be that the fonts are just really old versions and the
          postscript isn't clean for your system 9 G3s ? (installed from
          floppies) fonts were notoriously difficult in os9 and versions were
          problematic...it wasn't rare for an entire library from a font
          company to stop working with old versions of ATM...maybe a simple
          patch is all you need... Did you try googling patches for os 9 ATM...

          I do recall atm was great but always had lots of bugs because things
          just were not that stable back then...fonts were always a
          nightmare... I doubt your fonts are corrupt since it's happening on
          two machines that are following the same platform standards... I have
          an old version of a lot of different os9 software and could probably
          dig up an old version of suticase or a diff version of ATM, which
          would probably be a good place to start....




          bryan hutcheson
          manifesto letterpress / industrie standard
          4 open square way - L101
          holyoke, ma 01040
          p:877.529.0009

          www.manifestopress.com
          _________________________________
          full-service commercial letterpress
          announcements
          stationery
          packaging
          posters



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Gerald Lange
          Eric I don t use OS 9 for an awful lot anymore but I do keep it around for some type modification related stuff. But it is getting more and more foreign to me.
          Message 4 of 8 , Feb 6, 2009
            Eric

            I don't use OS 9 for an awful lot anymore but I do keep it around for
            some type modification related stuff. But it is getting more and more
            foreign to me.

            Generally trashing the preferences is the first thing you would trying
            OS 9. Is is possible for you to still upgrade to 9.2.2 and ATM 4.6.2a?
            These were very stable. I'd also recommend FontDoctor to try and fix
            the damaged fonts. The last version for OS 9x was 5.1 I believe. It
            will usually resolve any problems you would have. Weird that the
            output from one specific foundry would suddenly go bad. Any new
            additions to the OS (hard to imagine at this point) that might have
            occurred just previous to the problem?

            Is 4.6.1 ATM Deluxe? Get rid of it. You don't need ATM to manage the
            fonts. You need it but basically ignore it. Keep it simple. Never
            understood why folks feel the need to use font managers anyway. In OS
            9 just drop the font folders onto the System icon when you need them,
            remove them from the Fonts folder when you don't.

            Gerald
            http://BielerPress.blogspot.com


            --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, "parallel_imp" <Megalonyx@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > In System 9.1, using ATM Deluxe 4.6.1 for font management, many of
            my faces from
            > Monotype are now reported as "Damaged" (Baskerville, Bell, Bulmer,
            various Gill Sans, Van
            > Dijck, others). Even deleting the entire font list from ATM, and
            reinstalling the offending
            > fonts from their original floppies, and re-adding all my fonts to
            ATM, they are still reported
            > as damaged: some with bad outline fonts, some with bad FOND
            resources, etc. This is
            > happening on two diferent 9600s with G3 upgrades.
            > So, do I take these fonts to be truly damaged, or is it some
            anti-Monotype bias in ATM? I
            > had no problems with these same fonts in system 8 on the same
            computers, when font
            > management was by Suitcase 2.1.4, and many faces were successfully
            output to film.
            > --Eric Holub, SF
            >
          • parallel_imp
            Thanks to all who responded on- and off-list. Following Peter s link I did purchase the OS 9 version of FontDoctor, still available. And it shows extensive
            Message 5 of 8 , Feb 6, 2009
              Thanks to all who responded on- and off-list. Following Peter's link I did purchase the OS 9
              version of FontDoctor, still available. And it shows extensive font damage: much now
              repaired, some to be reinstalled. The original fonts were installed onto one Quadra, then
              moved as a group to other Macs and servers as workstations got upgraded, and I suppose
              damage has multiplied over the years with every move (and every crash). It may not have
              anything to do with ATM, which was actually under-reporting font damage considerably.
              I did use manual installation and de-installation of fonts for a while in system 9, though in
              systems 7 and 8, I used Suitcase. But increasingly customers have wanted pdf proofs, and for
              me that means either testing the pdf on another machine, or deinstalling fonts used in order
              to test whether fonts are properly embedded in the pdf, something I seldom get right on the
              first attempt. A year ago I stumbled across ATM Deluxe, which made that simple, as did sets
              for different jobs. Drat!
              In the 9600s, 9.1 is the highest supported OS installation, though I think 9.2 is possible
              with the patch Wish I Were. I guess I will try that. The version of ATM Deluxe I have is 4.6.1.
              Your reference to ATM 4.6.2 is to the simple control panel ATM (light?) right?. But I will test
              ATM-D with a repaired font library and see what happens.
              Recently I was given a G5 with Linotype FontExplorer X on it. Any warnings about that?
              --Eric Holub, SF
            • Gerald Lange
              Eric I think ATM Deluxe was dropped with Classic (9.2x)? Linotype FontExplorer X is an absolute essential with OS X. I have the 9.2 and 9.2.1 and 9.2.2
              Message 6 of 8 , Feb 6, 2009
                Eric

                I think ATM Deluxe was dropped with Classic (9.2x)? Linotype
                FontExplorer X is an absolute essential with OS X.

                I have the 9.2 and 9.2.1 and 9.2.2 upgrades if you need them. As I
                recall they have to be applied in sequence.

                Gerald
                http://BielerPress.blogspot.com

                --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, "parallel_imp" <Megalonyx@...>
                wrote:
                >
                > Thanks to all who responded on- and off-list. Following Peter's link
                I did purchase the OS 9
                > version of FontDoctor, still available. And it shows extensive font
                damage: much now
                > repaired, some to be reinstalled. The original fonts were installed
                onto one Quadra, then
                > moved as a group to other Macs and servers as workstations got
                upgraded, and I suppose
                > damage has multiplied over the years with every move (and every
                crash). It may not have
                > anything to do with ATM, which was actually under-reporting font
                damage considerably.
                > I did use manual installation and de-installation of fonts for a
                while in system 9, though in
                > systems 7 and 8, I used Suitcase. But increasingly customers have
                wanted pdf proofs, and for
                > me that means either testing the pdf on another machine, or
                deinstalling fonts used in order
                > to test whether fonts are properly embedded in the pdf, something I
                seldom get right on the
                > first attempt. A year ago I stumbled across ATM Deluxe, which made
                that simple, as did sets
                > for different jobs. Drat!
                > In the 9600s, 9.1 is the highest supported OS installation,
                though I think 9.2 is possible
                > with the patch Wish I Were. I guess I will try that. The version of
                ATM Deluxe I have is 4.6.1.
                > Your reference to ATM 4.6.2 is to the simple control panel ATM
                (light?) right?. But I will test
                > ATM-D with a repaired font library and see what happens.
                > Recently I was given a G5 with Linotype FontExplorer X on it. Any
                warnings about that?
                > --Eric Holub, SF
                >
              • Peter Fraterdeus
                ... All I can say is thank goodness the Berlin Wall came down ;-) Without all the Russian and other Eastern-block programmers working on it, we d still be in
                Message 7 of 8 , Feb 6, 2009
                  On 6 Feb 2009, at 1:11 PM, Gerald Lange wrote:

                  > Eric
                  >
                  > I think ATM Deluxe was dropped with Classic (9.2x)? Linotype
                  > FontExplorer X is an absolute essential with OS X.

                  All I can say is thank goodness the Berlin Wall came down ;-)

                  Without all the Russian and other Eastern-block programmers working on
                  it, we'd still be in font hell.
                  I don't actually know who did the engineering on FontExplorer, but it
                  would not surprise me at all Linotype picked it up from an East German
                  or Russian team. FontLab, of course, is 100% Russian in origin. Very
                  nice guys, all around, regulars and now major sponsors of the annual
                  ATypI conferences (this year in Mexico City! atypi.org)

                  I expect that the concentration on math and science made for a
                  generation of highly talented programmers.

                  Somehow, there has never been another font management tool that comes
                  anywhere close to FontExplorer.

                  Cheers!

                  peter


                  Peter Fraterdeus
                  Almost Free™ Business Cards from Exquisite Letterpress
                  http://slowprint.com/almostfreelp

                  New! SlowPrint Newsletter!
                  Signup: http://tinyurl.com/slowprint
                  Current: http://slowprint.com/slowprintnl
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.