Search the Community

Are you downloading and using the individual weights of Oswald, or are you trying to use the single variable version of the font? It sounds like you are trying to use the single variable version. As Affinity applications do not support variable fonts, they show up as a single style. So if this is a case of trying to use the variable font version, uninstall it. Install the other versions.

As for the GUI consistency, I just really meant that they should all be using consistent labels, perhaps organization where it makes sense and not the look/feel of the GUI. They could all learn from each other. They all are their own closed-loop developmentally and that can lead to awkward, incomplete or missing implementations and work-flows. Sitting around a table and expressing thoughts/ideas could lead to better implementation for us all. AD and CD already have the best in class OT feature support. Corel moves at a snail's pace as regards development. Even if I did know what their take is on variable font support, I couldn't say... I think that Adobe is more implementing stuff that Astute Graphics had done long ago for Illy than grabbing ideas from Serif. Which may be behind Astute Graphic's opening up their API for developers to implement themselves. And I think Serif ought to take a look at the licensing costs as their stuff is top-notch and it would get Serif from point A to point B more quickly. Serif needs to also expose their API for plug-in makers. I have mixed feelings about OT 1.8 spec as regards variable fonts. It's been done before and flopped (twice if I recall). This time around it has wide support among browser developers. And that is all the difference in the world. But whether this translates to desktop application makers and designers is hard to tell yet. If applications add solid support, designers would likely utilize the feature. That is where both Multiple Masters fell apart and GTX as well. Designers just didn't make the transition and even if they clamored for it, application support was spotty at best. Adobe tried to stop gap the lack of support with ATM but making instances in it (and other type applications) was seen somewhere between a hassle and a novelty. I am uncertain whether "build it and they will come" applies. I mostly do layout work. I have tens of thousands of fonts going back to Type 1 fonts from the late 1980s. The investment is crazy bad if I think about it. I don't think I am much different than others doing layout work. Much of my font decisions are tied to publishers, some to agencies and other designers. If they don't spec these fonts I myself won't purchase them with the exception of work where I get to recommend fonts. With that type of work where is the compelling reason to use a variable Myriad Pro font versus the current instances that exist? Or a whatever font design that is variable versus a family that isn't variable? With such a stockpile of fonts, what would be my reason for buying yet more? That's a rhetorical question, btw. But the question is there to show the hurdle I and other designers will have to face one day. Just because an application or ten applications have such support, unless publishing houses, agencies, etc., spec a variable font I myself won't be spending my money on them. I will spend money on upgrades that make the rest of my designing swifter and more assured.

Which version of the fonts do you have installed? In the 2105.24 (2021-05-25) version the names were all messed-up. Which could cause an issue like this. The names were fixed in the 2106.17 (2021-07-13) version. So make sure you have the 2106.17 version. https://github.com/microsoft/cascadia-code/releases/tag/v2106.17 If that does not fix it we will need more information. Also: Do not have the variable fonts installed along with the static fonts.

Switch to Figma, @JHutchinson. Just recently they implemented variable fonts support, among other useful updates. There is so many great things to be written about it, including the community they managed to build. regards, Matt

Affinity applications (and other) do not have full support for Variable fonts, the export of which then causes problems, see for example Therefore, it would be good if the Preflight report points out this fact - that the user uses font types that can be problematic. Thanks P.S. And maybe a vector/bitmap Color fonts?

It seems that the OP has downloaded the variable version. The Affinity apps don’t support variable fonts yet, so your screenshot must be showing us the static version.

+1,000 for variable fonts. I'm finding these are increasingly entering my workflow in recent months, and having to maintain both static (for Affinity apps) and variable (for pretty much every other app I use) versions of fonts is getting old.

Raleway comes in two varieties variable and static ttf. Affinity does not allow variable fonts at present. You can download the static ttf fom google fonts

Now that Google Font's new interface allows one to filter to show only variable fonts, we may now be at the beginning of where variable fonts start to gain critical mass. In fact, browser support is now just shy of 90% of worldwide users, according to https://caniuse.com/#feat=variable-fonts. I'm not quite ready yet to start using them in my web design, but we are a lot closer than I realized. As for layout work, where, unlike web design, I do not need to be concerned of the software support of what other people are using, I suspect I would use them rather heavily in Publisher if it were possible. It certainly is an exciting possibility.

Hi Affinity - support for variable fonts seem to be the only major feature missing from Publishers. I have many static fonts but there is often a style I cannot get without the variable sliding bars that I use in Adobe. It is really a joy and flexibility to use and hopefully it will make its way to Affinity products soon.

Thanks, @LondonSquirrel. That's an interesting article that provides some insight into how applications like the Affinity suite could handle variable fonts. However, it also makes it clear to me that adding that support would be even more complex than I realized.

Hi there, I also want to add my support for the variable font technology in Designer, Publisher and Photo. + 1 Fonts like this one can be used if we can utilize variable fonts.

If it was me, I wouldn't just turn them off I would delete them from the computer. Just my two cents. Also, is this is a Variable font, Affinity applications don't work with Variable fonts.

Affinity applications cannot use Coloured Fonts or Variable Fonts, perhaps this is the problem.

I think something should be done. Hopefully variable fonts compatibility will be added some time in the future (there are several feature requests for it). In the interim, it would probably be better if Affinity would just not load those fonts. But I don't know if that is a reasonable possibility from the programming side.

Variable fonts can’t currently be used in the Affinity apps. If that’s what you installed, you need to uninstall it/them and install the fonts from the ‘static’ folder instead.

The other good news from this article is that V2 is coming out this year, that is... if things go as planned. It would be nice if at least DXF import/export would be available when V2 comes out. Especially for those in the field of technical illustration (e.g. manuals) or need to export for cutting machines this would be really great to finally have this functionality. For those who need DWG support as well, the ODA has a free batch converter for Windows/Mac/Linux that can convert DWG files into DWF in batch or when you don't have DWG based software at all. That way you can still import into Affinity until DWG import/export is also implemented. Add support for variable fonts as well and I can finally do without CorelDRAW for most technical graphics. 🙂

And in the meantime, there is variable type support in two Adobe desktop applications creeping in. AI's implementation is an "experiment" of sorts and pretty much isn't done well. And of course browser support is getting better, Adobe has entered the fray of producing some and MS has one they included with an update to Windows. Quark will in all likelihood get in on the act before Adobe gets variable fonts in ID (well, they did with color fonts anyway, which ID cannot deal with). But the spec is still evolving and work today in a desktop application may well be for naught down the road until the spec is set in stone. The main battle really is the UI for manipulating the axes. And because of the shear number of axes, the UI really should respond like AD does with OT Features--that is, some of the possible axes should be font context aware and not present options not available in a given font. Oh, yeah, the Google thing. Google via (at least) a small team headed by Dave Crossland are advancing font technologies, including the latest endeavor, font validation. It's a big deal at least for foundries if not smaller shops. Consistency not only across font families but a whole foundy of fonts, one of the functions it does, has always been a bugaboo. "Static" fonts are one thing to check and ensure a consistency and proper functioning (fonts are run-time applications after all), but variable fonts are likely to exponentially increase the possibility of fonts bringing down an application or even an OS as is possible now with static fonts. It will be interesting to watch how it all shakes out. Mike

I just found out that InDesign now supports opentype variable fonts. My latest InDesign update lists it as something new, but curiously it appears to have been released at the end of last year if I am able to understand the date on this article correctly: https://helpx.adobe.com/indesign/using/using-fonts.html#variable_fonts I must have missed the update news. Could it be that variable fonts are now gaining support to the point where it is practical to start using them? I hope Serif has them in mind for the not too distant future. It would be great to stop relying on tricks like text stroke to give body text at small sizes just a bit more bite.

Oh, yeah, that makes sense! I found out about variable fonts just today. This is also good to know. I think I already did install some variable + static ones, now I know what to do, when I come across such a conflict! thank you!

No to Colour fonts, no to Variable fonts.

(It would indeed be interesting to discuss variable fonts … elsewhere. While this new technology is currently drawing a lot of attention in the type design world, I am still not sure whether it will have the resounding success that is hoped for in the typographers’ world. I haven’t seen any variable fonts yet that would really convince me of their typographic benefit over a well-developed typeface with optical grades. Pointers are welcome. Furthermore, as variable fonts tend to lay the burden on the user to proceed with taste – at least unless they are not using predefined locations in the design space –, I have the slight fear there might be another wave of bad typography on the horizon. Somehow, the current developments remind me of the early times when DTP on personal computers started off. But to discuss this further, let’s make a different thread.)

In that case, though, the bold would not show in the original Affinity document, either. (But also, even if it did show in Affinity, it would not show in the PDF because PDF doesn't support variable fonts, either.)

You have been bitten by the "Affinity does not support Variable Fonts" bug. Variable fonts like this one are not supported by any of the Affinity applications.

Yes, it seems to me variable fonts show up in Affinity, but only at one predefined setting. Hopefully, in the future we can adjust width and thickness of the fonts. By the way, here's a company who makes free variable fonts. https://www.etceteratype.co/