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

Comic Sans et al

Expand Messages
  • Gerald Lange
    I was recently asked to do the prepress on a children s book which required Comic Sans MS as its main text face [after working with it for a bit I developed
    Message 1 of 9 , Oct 29, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I was recently asked to do the prepress on a children's book which
      required Comic Sans MS as its main text face [after working with it
      for a bit I developed somewhat of a respect for it]. First thing I
      knew was that the printer would not take TrueType format so Comic Sans
      had to be converted to PS1. Just as Adobe was reluctant to produce a
      typeface in TT (with one exception), Microsoft never produced a
      PostScript font. So it had to be converted. FontLab's TransType just
      screwed up the metrics (as per usual) so I went back to good old
      Fontographer (a major concern here was that FOG never acquired the
      license for Delta hinting). But it worked. Next thing was to create
      another half-dozen instances of the face for size optimization.

      The whole point here is that Microsoft generally provided Comic Sans
      to folks as a package purchase deal without leasing contract. Likely
      not a big concern, but most foundries these days do insist on NO
      modification to their typefaces. As a traditional letterpress printer
      I am not trying to modify the face in a way that deviates from intent
      but merely to bring it to what it should be on the printed page. And I
      apply that in my other typographic activities as well.

      I'm not sure how many printers actually modify digital typefaces for
      letterpress, but if you do, is the leasing restriction a concern? And
      should it be? And, more importantly, since the font format owners (Adobe, Apple, Mircosoft) actually provide folks like FontLab (which now owns Fontographer) their code, should type foundries who piggy-back on this code, actually have a say in the matter?

      Gerald
    • Michael T. Metz
      Give your new face a different name. Comical Sans GL Mike The whole point here is that Microsoft generally provided Comic Sans to folks as a package
      Message 2 of 9 , Oct 29, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Give your "new face" a different name.

        Comical Sans GL

        Mike




        The whole point here is that Microsoft generally provided Comic Sans
        to folks as a package purchase deal without leasing contract. Likely
        not a big concern, but most foundries these days do insist on NO
        modification to their typefaces.

        -----Original Message-----
        From: PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
        [mailto:PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Gerald Lange
        Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 2:04 AM
        To: PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [PPLetterpress] Comic Sans et al
      • Dan Franklin
        Gerald Lange, in discussing a problem he encountered in modification of a digital font, enlarged his discussion to the legality of ... Some foundries are more
        Message 3 of 9 , Oct 29, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Gerald Lange, in discussing a problem he encountered in modification
          of a digital font, enlarged his discussion to the legality of
          modifying such fonts, then queried:

          >I'm not sure how many printers actually modify digital typefaces for
          >letterpress, but if you do, is the leasing restriction a concern? And
          >should it be? And, more importantly, since the font format owners
          >(Adobe, Apple, Mircosoft) actually provide folks like FontLab (which
          >now owns Fontographer) their code, should type foundries who
          >piggy-back on this code, actually have a say in the matter?

          Some foundries are more restrictive than others. Adobe takes what I
          consider a sensible approach. I recently needed to create an
          additional two dozen accented characters, plus random others, in
          Adobe Jenson for a Latin book I'm co-authoring and composing. In
          e-mail correspondence about this and other issues with a member of
          Adobe's type team, he assured me that the Adobe end-user license
          agreement (EULA) 'gives our customers the right to modify the fonts
          for their own use (which naturally excludes things like
          redistribution)'. So ...

          (1) May I make changes to the three OpenType fonts in question and
          use the new fonts in my book? Yes.
          (2) May I sell these modified fonts to someone else? No.
          (3) May I give these modified fonts to someone else? No.
          (4) If someone else wants me to modify a font for her (and can prove
          that she legally owns the font), may I modify it and give or sell her
          the modified font? I don't know.

          The license agreement of most digital font foundries states that no
          modification can be made without the permission of the foundry. In
          fact, my experience has been that the permission is generally easily
          obtained, but you must usually tell them that you only want to make
          the dashes thicker, for example. You are less likely to obtain
          permission if you want to vary the shape of the tail of the 'y' than
          if you want to make the lowercase descenders slightly longer.

          By the way, FontLab worked wonderfully in my OpenType font modifications.
        • Gerald Lange
          Dan Congratulations on your OT success with FontLab. While an excellent font editor, the manual is quite inscrutable. Took me a month to put together an
          Message 4 of 9 , Oct 29, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Dan

            Congratulations on your OT success with FontLab. While an excellent
            font editor, the manual is quite inscrutable. Took me a month to put
            together an understandable font modification sequence, patterned after
            Fontographer, and that just for PS1. Those boys really need to hire a
            technical writer. I don't suppose you'd care to contribute your OT
            routine?

            Gerald

            >
            > By the way, FontLab worked wonderfully in my OpenType font
            modifications.
            >
          • Dan Franklin
            Hi, Gerald. ... I think they have. The current manual, available as a PDF, is really pretty good. Coupled with Leslie Cabarga s Learn Fontlab Fast, I haven t
            Message 5 of 9 , Oct 29, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi, Gerald.

              >Congratulations on your OT success with FontLab. While an excellent
              >font editor, the manual is quite inscrutable. Took me a month to put
              >together an understandable font modification sequence, patterned after
              >Fontographer, and that just for PS1. Those boys really need to hire a
              >technical writer.

              I think they have. The current manual, available as a PDF, is really
              pretty good. Coupled with Leslie Cabarga's 'Learn Fontlab Fast,' I
              haven't had to ask dopey questions of the TypoL list except where to
              put 'new' characters that don't have Unicode numbers yet.

              > I don't suppose you'd care to contribute your OT
              >routine?

              I would be happy to share if I had one. The extent of my work in
              FontLab has been creating accented and new characters, although I
              also changed some of the kerning parameters, as well as a couple of
              auto-ligature calls (e.g., when InDesign sees long-a + long-e, it
              automatically changes the combination to long-ae).

              I haven't done font-weight modifications yet, and I'm sorry to have
              given that impression. My own Fontographer work in that area has been
              primitive compared to your own.

              One of the things I like most about FontLab, and perhaps I'm
              comparing apples and pomegranates here, is that modified Type1 fonts
              generated in Fontographer don't have as good-looking screen versions
              as the original fonts (I mean across the entire font, not just the
              characters I modified), but the OpenType Adobe Jenson fonts generated
              in FontLab have screen versions that are identical to the original
              fonts.

              -=-=-=-

              But what about the Goudy fonts in the Lanston collection at P22? Do
              they require weight modification at, say, 14pt? From the looks of
              their on-line showings, I have tentatively concluded that many don't
              need modification. Am I wrong?
            • Gerald Lange
              Dan For some reason none of my links for FontLab are working, and even through the Google portal I m just getting a scrambled message. Are you using the new
              Message 6 of 9 , Oct 29, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Dan

                For some reason none of my links for FontLab are working, and even
                through the Google portal I'm just getting a scrambled message.

                Are you using the new Studio 5? I've got the 4.6 manual and that is
                the one I was talking about.

                I haven't had the hinting problems with PS1 that would cause screen
                disturbance. The sequence I use is based on the old Altys "underground
                manual," which dealt with the metrics issues fairly thoroughly. These
                are just sort of assumed in the FL manual. It's hardly for dummies.
                (Did you see today's Microsoft Typography's comment?)

                Basically, I'm hoping that since FL has broken the FOG code and intend
                to make the editor OT aware and a middle range editor rather than a
                type design program, that I can stay with it and be fairly comfy.

                I haven't had any call to modify an OT font so basically I have stayed
                out of the fray. But the sands have slowly shifted. From all
                indicators, PS1 will be system defunct in a matter of years so time to
                get on the ball.

                Don't know what to tell you about P22. My inclination is that all
                fonts need extensive size optimization (not just small text, text,
                display). I recently had a student ask me why European metal fonts
                were issued in L and S per point size. How do you explain the benefits
                of range to folks who have no understanding of it? It's sort of a long
                story. Fortunately, she's a good listener (and a great questioner) and
                hopefully in for the long haul. :—)

                All best


                Gerald


                >
                > >Congratulations on your OT success with FontLab. While an excellent
                > >font editor, the manual is quite inscrutable. Took me a month to put
                > >together an understandable font modification sequence, patterned after
                > >Fontographer, and that just for PS1. Those boys really need to hire a
                > >technical writer.
                >
                > I think they have. The current manual, available as a PDF, is really
                > pretty good. Coupled with Leslie Cabarga's 'Learn Fontlab Fast,' I
                > haven't had to ask dopey questions of the TypoL list except where to
                > put 'new' characters that don't have Unicode numbers yet.
                >
                > > I don't suppose you'd care to contribute your OT
                > >routine?
                >
                > I would be happy to share if I had one. The extent of my work in
                > FontLab has been creating accented and new characters, although I
                > also changed some of the kerning parameters, as well as a couple of
                > auto-ligature calls (e.g., when InDesign sees long-a + long-e, it
                > automatically changes the combination to long-ae).
                >
                > I haven't done font-weight modifications yet, and I'm sorry to have
                > given that impression. My own Fontographer work in that area has been
                > primitive compared to your own.
                >
                > One of the things I like most about FontLab, and perhaps I'm
                > comparing apples and pomegranates here, is that modified Type1 fonts
                > generated in Fontographer don't have as good-looking screen versions
                > as the original fonts (I mean across the entire font, not just the
                > characters I modified), but the OpenType Adobe Jenson fonts generated
                > in FontLab have screen versions that are identical to the original
                > fonts.
                >
                > -=-=-=-
                >
                > But what about the Goudy fonts in the Lanston collection at P22? Do
                > they require weight modification at, say, 14pt? From the looks of
                > their on-line showings, I have tentatively concluded that many don't
                > need modification. Am I wrong?
                >
              • Dan Franklin
                Hi, Gerald. ... Ouch. I m using 4.6 with a manual I downloaded 2 or 3 months ago. ... Font seeks editor ... FontLab need not apply. That s good! ...
                Message 7 of 9 , Oct 29, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi, Gerald.

                  >Are you using the new Studio 5? I've got the 4.6 manual and that is
                  >the one I was talking about.

                  Ouch. I'm using 4.6 with a manual I downloaded 2 or 3 months ago.

                  >I haven't had the hinting problems with PS1 that would cause screen
                  >disturbance. The sequence I use is based on the old Altys "underground
                  >manual," which dealt with the metrics issues fairly thoroughly. These
                  >are just sort of assumed in the FL manual. It's hardly for dummies.
                  >(Did you see today's Microsoft Typography's comment?)

                  'Font seeks editor ... FontLab need not apply.' That's good!

                  >Basically, I'm hoping that since FL has broken the FOG code and intend
                  >to make the editor OT aware and a middle range editor rather than a
                  >type design program, that I can stay with it and be fairly comfy.

                  Actually, they *bought* the FOG code and hired on as consultant the
                  fellow who's been trying to support it all these years.

                  Don't forget -- you can stay up an hour later tonight. Clocks change
                  at 2 <smallcaps>a.m.<endsmallcaps>.
                • Gerald Lange
                  Hi again Early info was that Adobe just gave it to them as part of the merger with Macromedia and as I recall (but don t ever depend upon that!) Yuri mentioned
                  Message 8 of 9 , Oct 29, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi again

                    Early info was that Adobe just gave it to them as part of the merger
                    with Macromedia and as I recall (but don't ever depend upon that!) Yuri
                    mentioned in T-D that they had broken the code. I guess it sticks as I
                    thought it strange.

                    Yeah, "Der Font Meister." Ever consider that it might just be the other way round? Except to kick it up to PowerMac functionality FOG was not upgraded while owned by Macromedia for over nine years. And that technical support info was mostly Altys reissue.

                    Gerald

                    >Actually, they *bought* the FOG code and hired on as consultant the
                    >fellow who's been trying to support it all these years.
                    >
                    >Don't forget -- you can stay up an hour later tonight. Clocks change
                    >at 2 <smallcaps>a.m.<endsmallcaps>.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                  • Gerald Lange
                    Dan I m hoping you can shed more light on this. Since it worked. . . The encoding is quite crucial to success. What specifically were your incoming and
                    Message 9 of 9 , Oct 31, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dan

                      I'm hoping you can shed more light on this. Since it worked. . .

                      The encoding is quite crucial to success. What specifically were your
                      incoming and outgoing "preferences" for "encoding" with the OT Jenson?

                      Offlist if you prefer.

                      Gerald



                      --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, Dan Franklin <dan@v...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Hi, Gerald.
                      >
                      > >Are you using the new Studio 5? I've got the 4.6 manual and that is
                      > >the one I was talking about.
                      >
                      > Ouch. I'm using 4.6 with a manual I downloaded 2 or 3 months ago.
                      >
                      > >I haven't had the hinting problems with PS1 that would cause screen
                      > >disturbance. The sequence I use is based on the old Altys "underground
                      > >manual," which dealt with the metrics issues fairly thoroughly. These
                      > >are just sort of assumed in the FL manual. It's hardly for dummies.
                      > >(Did you see today's Microsoft Typography's comment?)
                      >
                      > 'Font seeks editor ... FontLab need not apply.' That's good!
                      >
                      > >Basically, I'm hoping that since FL has broken the FOG code and intend
                      > >to make the editor OT aware and a middle range editor rather than a
                      > >type design program, that I can stay with it and be fairly comfy.
                      >
                      > Actually, they *bought* the FOG code and hired on as consultant the
                      > fellow who's been trying to support it all these years.
                      >
                      > Don't forget -- you can stay up an hour later tonight. Clocks change
                      > at 2 <smallcaps>a.m.<endsmallcaps>.
                      >
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.