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

Re: [PPLetterpress] Re: Font Formats

Expand Messages
  • Harold Kyle
    ... Two reasons that I ve heard: 1) Initially service bureaus had erratic output because the application support for TT was not as dependable as PS. RIPs were
    Message 1 of 6 , May 6, 2005
      On 5/6/05 11:24 AM, "alex brooks" <alexbrooks@...> wrote:
      > 1: How did TT get the reputation of being inferior to PS

      Two reasons that I've heard:
      1) Initially service bureaus had erratic output because the application
      support for TT was not as dependable as PS. RIPs were much less
      sophisticated then and it was hard to proof films before actually processing
      them. PS typefaces reduced costly mistakes.
      2) TT are cross-platform typefaces, and initially designers would attempt to
      bridge platforms by converting a PS typeface to TT. This resulted in a
      questionable heritage for TT typefaces...service bureaus weren't always sure
      they were generated correctly or that they were entirely dependable.

      Nowadays most applications are well suited for output of TT faces and PDF
      formats have reduced the need to migrate typefaces across platforms.

      > 2: What are the differences between TT and PS then, besides 2nd and 3rd
      > order curves. Support? Availability of quality fonts?
      It's all in the math:
      http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/bezier.html
      Aesthetics don't really play into this difference, I don't believe. For a
      more complete expanation, this site has a lot of info:
      http://www.prepressure.com/fonts/truetype01.htm

      Harold


      Boxcar Press
      Fine Printing / Digital Letterpress Supplies
      Delavan Center / 501 W. Fayette St. / Studio 222 / Syracuse, NY 13204
      315-473-0930 phone / 315-473-0967 fax / www.boxcarpress.com
    • Gerald Lange
      Harold I m not sure this is entirely accurate. PostScript was licensed as an important feature of output devices such as imagesetters. TT had to be converted.
      Message 2 of 6 , May 6, 2005
        Harold

        I'm not sure this is entirely accurate. PostScript was licensed as an
        important feature of output devices such as imagesetters. TT had to be
        converted. There are hinting considerations that have made TT
        inferior, at least in the earlier years. Better TT fonts used Delta
        hinting but it was quite a guarded technology. Even Fontographer was
        never able to get the licensing. But TT isn't cross-platform. Or least
        it certainly wasn't... Even the latest Mac and Microsoft systems have
        incompatibility issues regarding TT fonts designed for one platform or
        the other, and Apple makes no bones about it. . . they're not
        interested. And, they're not all that thrilled about extending a hand
        to Adobe's/Microsoft's OT either.

        Re: PDFs. Older versions of Acrobat would not function properly with
        TT fonts so the PDF assumption is not exactly correct. To my
        knowledge, Adobe only ever made one typeface in the TT format. It's
        not exactly like they were fond, or supportive, of a competing format.

        A primary reason Adobe took the unprecedented risk of unlicensed its
        proprietary PS1 format was to wipe out Bitstream's proprietary format
        (at that time its major competition). Adobe wasn't concerned about
        font sales, they wanted to ensure PostScript as the dominant page
        description language (used in output devices). A brilliant move but
        one that has been problematic, in terms of the continuance of
        unlicensed font formats and rights of usage, ever since.


        Gerald

        --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, Harold Kyle <harold@b...> wrote:
        > On 5/6/05 11:24 AM, "alex brooks" <alexbrooks@U...> wrote:
        > > 1: How did TT get the reputation of being inferior to PS
        >
        > Two reasons that I've heard:
        > 1) Initially service bureaus had erratic output because the application
        > support for TT was not as dependable as PS. RIPs were much less
        > sophisticated then and it was hard to proof films before actually
        processing
        > them. PS typefaces reduced costly mistakes.
        > 2) TT are cross-platform typefaces, and initially designers would
        attempt to
        > bridge platforms by converting a PS typeface to TT. This resulted in a
        > questionable heritage for TT typefaces...service bureaus weren't
        always sure
        > they were generated correctly or that they were entirely dependable.
        >
        > Nowadays most applications are well suited for output of TT faces
        and PDF
        > formats have reduced the need to migrate typefaces across platforms.
        >
        > > 2: What are the differences between TT and PS then, besides 2nd
        and 3rd
        > > order curves. Support? Availability of quality fonts?
        > It's all in the math:
        > http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/bezier.html
        > Aesthetics don't really play into this difference, I don't believe.
        For a
        > more complete expanation, this site has a lot of info:
        > http://www.prepressure.com/fonts/truetype01.htm
        >
        > Harold
        >
        >
        > Boxcar Press
        > Fine Printing / Digital Letterpress Supplies
        > Delavan Center / 501 W. Fayette St. / Studio 222 / Syracuse, NY 13204
        > 315-473-0930 phone / 315-473-0967 fax / www.boxcarpress.com
      • Gerald Lange
        FYI on TT in the PS environment: A tech at Apple has informed me that when a TT font is sent to a PostScript printer (or imagesetter) it normally, dependent
        Message 3 of 6 , May 8, 2005
          FYI on TT in the PS environment:

          A tech at Apple has informed me that when a TT font is sent to a
          PostScript printer (or imagesetter) it normally, dependent upon the
          printer routines, has to be "converted" to a form of PostScript. In
          most cases this would be a font format called PostScript Type 42 (a
          co-development of Apple and Adobe), which is essentially a functional
          PostScript "wrapper," similar in kind to the OpenType "wrapper" both
          PS1 and TT are given in the OT environment. Other than that, it's not
          a case of one being inferior to the other or vice versa, just a matter
          of functionality in any given environment.

          Gerald
          http://Bielerpress.blogspot.com
        • Gerald Lange
          Published last Thursday in Voice: AIGA Journal of Design was a very comprehensive history of digital type design, The Digital Past: When Typefaces Were
          Message 4 of 6 , May 23, 2005
            Published last Thursday in Voice: AIGA Journal of Design was a very
            comprehensive history of digital type design, "The Digital Past: When
            Typefaces Were Experimental" by Paul Shaw. It reveals the intricacies
            of how the evolving technology has influenced typeface designs.

            http://voice.aiga.org/content.cfm?ContentAlias=_getfullarticle&aid=%23%2C%3EO%24%0A

            Gerald
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.