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

Re: new digital Sabon and photopolymer printed specimen

Expand Messages
  • Gerald Lange
    ... new version was announced at the ATypI typography conference just concluded i= n ... Brian Thanks for letting us know about this. The new Sabon looks
    Message 1 of 18 , Oct 14, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      > You can see photos of a specimen of a new version of Sabon being printed
      > from photopolymer plates at this site:
      > http://www.porcheztypo.com/atypi/cpbook.html
      > The type design work has been done by Jean-François Porchez, a well known=

      > French designer, for Linotype. (The site's text is also in French). This =
      new
      > version was announced at the ATypI typography conference just concluded i=
      n
      > Rome.
      > Brian Allen
      > Mountain View, California

      Brian

      Thanks for letting us know about this. The new Sabon looks great.

      What do you know about the new Optima? Do you have any information as
      to when will that be issued? Will this be a Linotype Library release
      or through another foundry?

      I've a project using the old Optima which I had to rework the hell
      out of to make it work well letterpress. And then. afterward, I saw a
      notice somewhere on the new issue!

      Gerald
    • Gerald Lange
      Brian Another quick question somewhat related to my very recent post. I received the Indie Fonts specimen catalog from P22 and in reading the info in the back
      Message 2 of 18 , Oct 14, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Brian

        Another quick question somewhat related to my very recent post. I
        received the Indie Fonts specimen catalog from P22 and in reading the
        info in the back about Use of Fonts I was surprised to see a note
        that reworking (altering) a font is illegal. I wasn't aware of this
        previously and have never seen it stated before.

        So, if, for letterpress printing, I rework a font like the Optima in
        FOG and redo sizing and scaling weights etc am I actually in violation
        of the law?

        Gerald
      • Fontdr@aol.com
        You are not in violation of any law if you don t sell your modifications under the original name. Bob Trogman Facsimile Fonts
        Message 3 of 18 , Oct 14, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          You are not in violation of any law if you don't sell your modifications
          under the original name.

          Bob Trogman
          Facsimile Fonts
        • Brian Allen
          Gerald - Yes, there is a reworked version of Optima in the works from Linotype. It has been shown at 2 type conferences now, and I thought I d see it at their
          Message 4 of 18 , Oct 15, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Gerald -
            Yes, there is a reworked version of Optima in the works from Linotype. It
            has been shown at 2 type conferences now, and I thought I'd see it at their
            web site: www.fontexplorer.com now, but don't. I don't know when it will be
            available for sale. There are new weights and styles, including a true
            italic (not obliqued roman) and a titling font. Type people have mixed
            reactions to it, but Hermann Zapf was sitting next to Akira Kobayashi at the
            computer terminal directing the changes, so it is blessed by HZ. It is a
            Linotype exclusive, highly unlikely to be offered through any other
            distributor.

            While at the Linotype site, check out the newly released fonts of Adrian
            Frutiger - Icone, Iridium, and Breughal, only now converted to Type One
            format, 20+ years since they were available in phototype/CRT forms. They are
            part of the "Frutiger's Life" sets. These 3 were written about by Chuck
            Bigelow in "Fine Print on Type".

            Re: altering fonts. Not only can you not resell the font under its own name,
            you may not resell it at all. Modifying the data is called a "derivative
            work", which I'm sure is covered by the license agreement. The fine points
            of copyright/trademark issues are complicated and I am loathe to make
            blanket statements about things I don't fully understand. To strictly follow
            the rules, I believe you need permission to alter a font. In practical
            terms, I think you are OK if it's for personal use only; do not under any
            circumstance give away or sell the altered data. But I know you wouldn't do
            that anyway.
            The AIGA has a pamphlet on font usage and copyright, and while it is still
            too legalistic in tone for me, may help clarify matters. It was sent to
            members last year, but maybe it's available at their web site - aiga.org.

            Regards,
            Brian Allen
            Mountain View, CA
            Agfa Monotype employee


            on 10/14/02 1:49 PM, Gerald Lange at bieler@... wrote:

            >
            >> You can see photos of a specimen of a new version of Sabon being printed
            >> from photopolymer plates at this site:
            >> http://www.porcheztypo.com/atypi/cpbook.html
            >> The type design work has been done by Jean-François Porchez, a well known=
            >
            >
            >> French designer, for Linotype. (The site's text is also in French). This =
            >
            > new
            >> version was announced at the ATypI typography conference just concluded i=
            >
            > n
            >> Rome.
            >> Brian Allen
            >> Mountain View, California
            >
            > Brian
            >
            > Thanks for letting us know about this. The new Sabon looks great.
            >
            > What do you know about the new Optima? Do you have any information as
            > to when will that be issued? Will this be a Linotype Library release
            > or through another foundry?
            >
            > I've a project using the old Optima which I had to rework the hell
            > out of to make it work well letterpress. And then. afterward, I saw a
            > notice somewhere on the new issue!
            >
            > Gerald
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > • To respond to a post or post a message to the membership:
            > PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
            > • Encountering problems? contact:
            > PPLetterpress-owner@yahoogroups.com
            > • To unsubscribe:
            > PPLetterpress-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
          • Fontdr@aol.com
            Question: Is the use of Fontographer illegal? Many modifications are possible and are they illegal? The laws of governing modifying fonts are different in the
            Message 5 of 18 , Oct 16, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Question: Is the use of Fontographer illegal? Many modifications are possible
              and are they illegal? The laws of governing modifying fonts are different in
              the US than in Europe.
              Congress a one time considered the alphabet in the public domain and only
              the name could be protected. When it comes to software, then the legal
              battles will never cease. Incidentially, Compugraphic at one time was one of
              the biggest offenders of type theft by altering the name.
              Bob Trogman
              Facsimile Fonts
            • Gerald Lange
              ... I m not sure how much Congress was involved with the alphabet and copyright issues. But type design has been long considered an industrial practice rather
              Message 6 of 18 , Oct 16, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                > Question: Is the use of Fontographer illegal? Many modifications are possible
                > and are they illegal? The laws of governing modifying fonts are different in
                > the US than in Europe.
                > Congress a one time considered the alphabet in the public domain and only
                > the name could be protected. When it comes to software, then the legal
                > battles will never cease. Incidentially, Compugraphic at one time was one of
                > the biggest offenders of type theft by altering the name.
                > Bob Trogman
                > Facsimile Fonts


                I'm not sure how much Congress was involved with the alphabet and
                copyright issues. But type design has been long considered an
                industrial practice rather than a product and I believe not
                copyrightable under US law because of this consideration and maybe as
                well by the possible restrictions that might impinge upon the user in
                consideration with the idea of freedom of speech. Well, it sounds
                reasonable! Afterall, in the US, metal type is duty free as a result.

                I think the issue is less one of copyright than breach of contract.
                When you buy the software you are entering into a contract with the
                manufacturer. I assume the wording regarding modification was
                initially intended to prevent unlawful copying or distribution: a
                slight altering of points and a change of name and off the thief
                goes. Standing alone it seems a bit odd since typeface designs are
                themselves derivative by nature.

                The long history of type foundry theft, e.g. your mention of
                Compugraphic, and there many other notorious incidents, ATF,
                Hamilton, etc, does put a shadow on all of this. I've always gotten
                the silent treatment from digital type designers when I mention that
                when Adobe unlicensed its PS font format it gave birth to the growth
                of the indy foundries, none of whom have ever paid a cent to Adobe
                for the privilege of using the formatting. So, theoretically, I guess
                I am amazed at the clamor over copying issues given the
                uncontrollable nature of digital intercourse and, especially, since
                the unlicensing of format encouraged this is the first place. The
                gift horse is a gread ride but the flies are so annoying!!!

                Never mentioned is the fact that user copying can easily be
                preventable by doing exactly what they did in the pre-digital analog
                days. Sell proprietary software and proprietary typefaces. That won't
                stop the other foundries (those that can afford to operate in such an
                environment) from stealing your stuff though...

                Gerald
              • Katie Harper
                All this talk about copyright of fonts and how broad or narrow the protections, brings up another aspect. What about type designers and what happens to their
                Message 7 of 18 , Oct 17, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  All this talk about copyright of fonts and how broad or narrow the
                  protections, brings up another aspect. What about type designers and what
                  happens to their copyrighted artwork?

                  A serious problem that also was not a factor in the analog days is the
                  ability of the digital font user to actually change the way the type looks.
                  I'm not talking here about the incremental changes to a font that make it
                  print better on letterpress, but what is far more common: the great unwashed
                  out there taking a well designed letterform and squeezing it, squashing it,
                  smashing it, stretching it, pulling its legs and arms off without mercy...
                  etc., all because the computer lets them do it and no one is telling them
                  that maybe it's not okay... As a teacher, I spend a lot of time trying to
                  instill in my students a respect for the type designer's product, but most
                  people are using computers without any such guidance.

                  This to me is a far greater crime. I think back to the days when Fred Goudy
                  would design a font that was distributed to printers around the land,
                  sleeping well at night because he could know with a reasonable certainty
                  that anyone who used his fonts would produce the letterforms that he
                  designed. A digital type designer sends his or her children off to a very
                  cruel world. Do they just grit their teeth and wave good-by to the kids? It
                  would be interesting to know if there is any legal protection for the
                  designs and their integrity.


                  Katie Harper
                  Ars Brevis Press
                  Cincinnati, OH
                  513-233-9588
                  http://www.arsbrevispress.com
                • Peter Fraterdeus
                  Katie Good questions all! I ve been in the digital type biz since 1987, when I released Prospera and started my Alphabets, Inc. (www.alphabets.com) Prospera
                  Message 8 of 18 , Oct 17, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Katie

                    Good questions all!
                    I've been in the digital type biz since 1987, when I released Prospera and started my "Alphabets, Inc." (www.alphabets.com)

                    Prospera was the result (partially) of work I'd done under a NEA Design Project Grant, which included some study with Hermann Zapf at RIT, and research in Europe, as well as plenty of toner run through the LaserWriter ;-)

                    In a word : yes.
                    We must 'grit [our] teeth and wave good-by to the kids' as you put it.

                    There is simply no way to sell a digital type product that can't be treated like a Doberman's favorite sock toy. Moreover, it's not only the unwashed that partake in this ;-)

                    Nonetheless, I personally believe that the fine people who actually PURCHASE fonts (as opposed to the art and design students who generally "inherit" huge libraries from their educational institutions) DO respect the designers.

                    Also, modern type design should, clearly, take into account the, 'plastic' nature of the instant repro technology, and be, at minimum, forgiving, or better, designed for adaptation of this nature... Of course, such efforts are easily defeated, in any case...

                    At 9:02 AM -0400 2002-10-17, Katie Harper wrote:
                    >All this talk about copyright of fonts and how broad or narrow the
                    >protections, brings up another aspect. What about type designers and what
                    >happens to their copyrighted artwork?
                    >
                    >A serious problem that also was not a factor in the analog days is the
                    >ability of the digital font user to actually change the way the type looks.
                    >I'm not talking here about the incremental changes to a font that make it
                    >print better on letterpress, but what is far more common: the great unwashed
                    >out there taking a well designed letterform and squeezing it, squashing it,
                    >smashing it, stretching it, pulling its legs and arms off without mercy...
                    >etc., all because the computer lets them do it and no one is telling them
                    >that maybe it's not okay... As a teacher, I spend a lot of time trying to
                    >instill in my students a respect for the type designer's product, but most
                    >people are using computers without any such guidance.

                    A crime, indeed, yet, in the overall perspective of real life, a petty misdemeanor.
                    Would we rather have graphical computers only available to the professional, registered typographic communicator???

                    No. The display of bad typography is a great boon to the exchange of ideas.
                    Also, it makes our meticulous work look even better than it deserves l;-)

                    While the majority will continue to use dtp software with results that make us queasy, there are those that have begun on the path to enlightenment, sometimes through the gentle prodding of teachers like yourself, other times, simply by coming to the realization that there's something that designers do that seems to make a positive difference in how well that message is received.

                    >
                    >This to me is a far greater crime. I think back to the days when Fred Goudy
                    >would design a font that was distributed to printers around the land,
                    >sleeping well at night because he could know with a reasonable certainty
                    >that anyone who used his fonts would produce the letterforms that he

                    Fred Goudy lost plenty of sleep, precisely because many of those printers were using his letterforms from foundries that blatantly stole and reproduced them!

                    >designed. A digital type designer sends his or her children off to a very
                    >cruel world. Do they just grit their teeth and wave good-by to the kids? It
                    >would be interesting to know if there is any legal protection for the
                    >designs and their integrity.

                    Not in the US, other than design patents, which are harder to enforce, due to need to prove 'uniqueness'. Design patents are given for furniture lines, table ware, etc...

                    In Europe there are far stronger protections on the actual shapes of the letters. Here, the only thing that CAN be copyrighted is the SOFTWARE that produces the outlines! (and thus the data points and any derivatives thereof.)

                    >Katie Harper
                    >Ars Brevis Press
                    >Cincinnati, OH
                    >513-233-9588
                    http://www.arsbrevispress.com

                    Nonetheless, as I mentioned, those that BUY fonts are not usually the ones that worry them.
                    Also, some of the high end boutique 'foundries' charge enormous prices and include extra goodies (letterpress booklets among them if I recall) to provide their users with an 'incentive', if you will, to, first, not give the font away to all their friends, and second, to use it with knowledge and respect...

                    In any case, I've come a long way from my early typographic conservatism (I'm still a social liberal ;-) and I now feel that freedom to communicate is far more important than fussy, possibly elitist notions about OTHER people's use of type. This (I hope) clearly doesn't mean that >>I<< would abuse a beautiful design for shock value ;-)

                    Cheers!

                    Peter

                    --
                    -
                    AzByCx DwEvFu GtHsIr JqKpLo MnNmOl PkQjRi ShTgUf VeWdXc YbZa& @

                    Peter Fraterdeus http://www.midsummernightstamps.com
                    www.semiotx.com Magical Images from the Moon's Garden!

                    Save Our Congress from Moralistic Right-Wing Rubberstamp-ism.
                    Vote Democratic, but hold their feet to the progressive fire...

                    Whatever happened to the War Against Injustice and Poverty!
                    End Terrorism? End Poverty!
                  • caldrich45
                    As long as the font is for your own use and you don t sell or give the altered font away, you can do what you want with it. I believe that is fair use. You
                    Message 9 of 18 , Oct 31, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      As long as the font is for your own use and you don't sell or give the altered
                      font away, you can do what you want with it. I believe that is "fair use." You
                      can tear pages out of a book and highlight and cross out passages if you so
                      desire. you can paint over someone else's canvas if you have purchased a
                      painting. To me, this is no different. I belieive that legally, fonts are not
                      copyrighted, only the name. Once you alter it, you should rename it, it then
                      becomes a different font.
                    • Gerald Lange
                      Hi Yes, I think there is a legal simularity between the physical object that one is in possession of versus the intellectual effort of the creator... But when
                      Message 10 of 18 , Oct 31, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi

                        Yes, I think there is a legal simularity between the physical object
                        that one is in possession of versus the intellectual effort of the
                        creator...

                        But when you rename a font as far as I know the code name, the FOND
                        identification, is not altered. Could be wrong about that but I thought
                        both FOG and FL don't alter this. Maybe I'm confused about this?

                        Gerald

                        caldrich45 wrote:

                        >As long as the font is for your own use and you don't sell or give the altered
                        >font away, you can do what you want with it. I believe that is "fair use." You
                        >can tear pages out of a book and highlight and cross out passages if you so
                        >desire. you can paint over someone else's canvas if you have purchased a
                        >painting. To me, this is no different. I belieive that legally, fonts are not
                        >copyrighted, only the name. Once you alter it, you should rename it, it then
                        >becomes a different font.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      • Brian Allen
                        RE: regenerating font files in Fontographer (version 4+ for the Mac) - one can change the FOND ID number when making Macintosh PostScript fonts. When you get
                        Message 11 of 18 , Nov 3, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          RE: regenerating font files in Fontographer (version 4+ for the Mac) - one
                          can change the FOND ID number when making Macintosh PostScript fonts.
                          When you get to the "Generate Font Files" dialog and ask for a Macintosh
                          font, you'll see on the right side of the dialog: "Bitmap font to output"
                          "Format: NFNT, ID:xxxxx" (some number will be here)
                          This is the FOND ID number to change (use one less than 15,000)
                          When altering a font for personal use, one should both alter the name AND
                          the FOND ID number, to be sure ATM, application, and printer driver aren't
                          confused. And further, it's best to reboot your machine and printer to clear
                          cached memory of font ID numbers before installing the new font.
                          Brian Allen
                          who works in font production for Agfa Monotype
                          Mountain View, California
                          -----------
                          on 10/31/02 8:43 AM, Gerald Lange at bieler@... wrote:

                          > Hi
                          >
                          > Yes, I think there is a legal simularity between the physical object
                          > that one is in possession of versus the intellectual effort of the
                          > creator...
                          >
                          > But when you rename a font as far as I know the code name, the FOND
                          > identification, is not altered. Could be wrong about that but I thought
                          > both FOG and FL don't alter this. Maybe I'm confused about this?
                          >
                          > Gerald
                          >
                          > caldrich45 wrote:
                          >
                          >> As long as the font is for your own use and you don't sell or give the
                          >> altered
                          >> font away, you can do what you want with it. I believe that is "fair use."
                          >> You
                          >> can tear pages out of a book and highlight and cross out passages if you so
                          >> desire. you can paint over someone else's canvas if you have purchased a
                          >> painting. To me, this is no different. I belieive that legally, fonts are not
                          >> copyrighted, only the name. Once you alter it, you should rename it, it then
                          >> becomes a different font.
                          >>
                          >>
                          >>
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > ? To respond to a post or post a message to the membership:
                          > PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
                          > ? Encountering problems? contact:
                          > PPLetterpress-owner@yahoogroups.com
                          > ? To unsubscribe:
                          > PPLetterpress-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                          >
                          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          >
                        • Gerald Lange
                          ... Brian Thanks. I ve never done this and thus far neither my laser printer or any imagesetter that has been used has been confused. (?) Am I just lucky? I ve
                          Message 12 of 18 , Nov 3, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Brian Allen wrote:

                            >RE: regenerating font files in Fontographer (version 4+ for the Mac) - one
                            >can change the FOND ID number when making Macintosh PostScript fonts.
                            >When you get to the "Generate Font Files" dialog and ask for a Macintosh
                            >font, you'll see on the right side of the dialog: "Bitmap font to output"
                            >"Format: NFNT, ID:xxxxx" (some number will be here)
                            >This is the FOND ID number to change (use one less than 15,000)
                            >When altering a font for personal use, one should both alter the name AND
                            >the FOND ID number, to be sure ATM, application, and printer driver aren't
                            >confused. And further, it's best to reboot your machine and printer to clear
                            >cached memory of font ID numbers before installing the new font.
                            >Brian Allen
                            >who works in font production for Agfa Monotype
                            >Mountain View, California
                            >
                            >

                            Brian

                            Thanks. I've never done this and thus far neither my laser printer or
                            any imagesetter that has been used has been confused. (?) Am I just lucky?

                            I've been trying to put together a cheat sheet on FL like I did for FOG.
                            I see no real controls to recalc bitmaps or import metric info from the
                            original font like one would do in FOG. I've talked to an FL tech and he
                            says you don't have to, FL does it automatically. Well not from the
                            looks of the fonts I've generated. Spacing attributes are not correct at
                            all. Any tips and tricks? The manual is a complete nightmare, though I
                            must say I do like the Transformation Range capabilities.

                            Gerald

                            >
                            >
                          • Brian Allen
                            Gerald - I expect you ve been a little lucky. When you open the printer font file in Fontographer the first time and then generate a new Mac font + bitmap
                            Message 13 of 18 , Nov 3, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Gerald -
                              I expect you've been a little lucky. When you open the printer font file in
                              Fontographer the first time and then generate a new Mac font + bitmap
                              suitcase, a new FOND number is randomly generated. If you reopen that FOG
                              database file to make further alterations, Fontographer keeps that same FOND
                              ID when generating the new font files. This is where you might get fooled
                              and not see a change you thought you made.
                              Generally speaking, when a font is downloaded to an output device, the font
                              ID is checked. If a laser printer, say, already has something with that
                              number, theoretically it won't download a new font with the same ID and will
                              use the font data it had already cached. But with the level of complexity
                              now between operating systems, ATM, printer drivers, etc., it's hard to know
                              what goes on!
                              At work when I'm testing changes to PostScript fonts I reboot everything
                              between new installations, to be confident I am seeing the latest. (And I'm
                              using a specific FOND ID throughout the production cycle, so that's a reason
                              for continual rebooting.)
                              Brian Allen
                              Mountain View, CA

                              on 11/3/02 8:24 PM, Gerald Lange at bieler@... wrote:
                              > Brian
                              >
                              > Thanks. I've never done this and thus far neither my laser printer or
                              > any imagesetter that has been used has been confused. (?) Am I just lucky?
                              >
                              > I've been trying to put together a cheat sheet on FL like I did for FOG.
                              > I see no real controls to recalc bitmaps or import metric info from the
                              > original font like one would do in FOG. I've talked to an FL tech and he
                              > says you don't have to, FL does it automatically. Well not from the
                              > looks of the fonts I've generated. Spacing attributes are not correct at
                              > all. Any tips and tricks? The manual is a complete nightmare, though I
                              > must say I do like the Transformation Range capabilities.
                              >
                              > Gerald

                              >
                              >
                              > Brian Allen wrote:
                              >
                              >> RE: regenerating font files in Fontographer (version 4+ for the Mac) - one
                              >> can change the FOND ID number when making Macintosh PostScript fonts.
                              >> When you get to the "Generate Font Files" dialog and ask for a Macintosh
                              >> font, you'll see on the right side of the dialog: "Bitmap font to output"
                              >> "Format: NFNT, ID:xxxxx" (some number will be here)
                              >> This is the FOND ID number to change (use one less than 15,000)
                              >> When altering a font for personal use, one should both alter the name AND
                              >> the FOND ID number, to be sure ATM, application, and printer driver aren't
                              >> confused. And further, it's best to reboot your machine and printer to clear
                              >> cached memory of font ID numbers before installing the new font.
                              >> Brian Allen
                              >> who works in font production for Agfa Monotype
                              >> Mountain View, California
                              >>
                              >
                              > ? To respond to a post or post a message to the membership:
                              > PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
                              > ? Encountering problems? contact:
                              > PPLetterpress-owner@yahoogroups.com
                              > ? To unsubscribe:
                              > PPLetterpress-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                              >
                              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                              >
                            • Gerald Lange
                              ... file in ... that FOG ... same FOND ... fooled ... the font ... and will ... complexity ... to know ... (And I m ... a reason ... A long, long time ago a
                              Message 14 of 18 , Nov 3, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In PPLetterpress@y..., Brian Allen <allenprinter@y...> wrote:
                                > Gerald -
                                > I expect you've been a little lucky. When you open the printer font
                                file in
                                > Fontographer the first time and then generate a new Mac font + bitmap
                                > suitcase, a new FOND number is randomly generated. If you reopen
                                that FOG
                                > database file to make further alterations, Fontographer keeps that
                                same FOND
                                > ID when generating the new font files. This is where you might get
                                fooled
                                > and not see a change you thought you made.
                                > Generally speaking, when a font is downloaded to an output device,
                                the font
                                > ID is checked. If a laser printer, say, already has something with that
                                > number, theoretically it won't download a new font with the same ID
                                and will
                                > use the font data it had already cached. But with the level of
                                complexity
                                > now between operating systems, ATM, printer drivers, etc., it's hard
                                to know
                                > what goes on!
                                > At work when I'm testing changes to PostScript fonts I reboot everything
                                > between new installations, to be confident I am seeing the latest.
                                (And I'm
                                > using a specific FOND ID throughout the production cycle, so that's
                                a reason
                                > for continual rebooting.)
                                > Brian Allen


                                A long, long time ago a tech at Altsys told me never to regenerate
                                from one of their database files so I've always just tossed them.
                                Guess that was good advice.

                                I note that FontLab constructs a ghost font during the entire process,
                                somehow linking this with ATM (for the previews), and then dumps it
                                when the font is saved.. I've been tossing their database files as
                                well. Though I suspect one should start saving the AFM files as we
                                move ever closer to current and forthcoming technologies. (?).

                                Gerald

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