Fonts support in Affinity Publisher

[Vorador]

Hello everyone.

First I am sorry if this is duplicate or there is answer already (if there is I will be deeply obliged to anyone who can answer to me). Also may be I am incompetent - I do not want to say anything bad, and this may not be bug, but my fault (not knowing some setting for example). However - here is my problem.

First the problems with the fonts  - fonts are basically the main building block when you make any publication regardless of the type of it.

My first and main problem now is that Cyrillic fonts are not properly recognized and give error message of "Unsupported characters used" unless the font is .OTF - so no post script for example. When we make publications, catalogs, magazines, whatever - there is variety of fonts that are used and if they have Cyrillic encoding recognized by the other programs, and in this case there is Cyrillic encoding and it is recognized in variety of programs, the client wants to use it. But the program does not. Also the program uses some other fonts that it uses to substitute - but I cannot see what is used neither where - at least I was not able to make it to highlight the missing and substituted fonts - just the exclamation marker on my Character panel if i go locate it manually and then in font manager - this error message. I tried to see what is going on and yes this is the same - regardless if I open document, PDF or I create brand new document with Publisher itself.

It also does not recognize the fonts styles - here is an example what I mean:

We bought PostSript 1 - the font have Cyrillic and Latin and it has 12 styles - From Light all the way to black. The font works when you use Latin but not the Cyrillic symbols. However - when you want to use it to substitute other font, the font manager always show you Light style - regardless that you may have chosen to use Black (it will draw it properly by the way, just you cannot see the choice you have made). This particular font is PostScript type 1 again, tried with multiple of those.

However I am sure for Post Script 1 and do not know if it counts for other fonts also, but it makes your choices very restricted regardless of how many fonts you bought. If a font have Cyrillic and all other programs are seeing it, and can use it, I cannot say the client that he cannot use it just because my program does not support it. I hope this is all my fault but it looks like bug in the application for Mac.

I am using and having this issue on mac OSX 10.11.6 in this case, currently searching for workaround, by the way. I bought the program for Windows also - and there is no problem with Post Script 1 type fonts on it.

Also would like to ask what is the way to see what font have substituted the missing or "wrong" font and where -is there way to highlight it so it will be at a glance.

Best Regards.

[Vorador]

P.S. Interestingly enough, when I try to use find and replace function - the replace all leads to Crash.

Also had to restart the machine, because font manager decided that it will always put same font to substitute no matter what I choose. Had to reset from miscellaneous the program and then to reset the computer. The program still remember the fonts but not the UI settings.

[Vorador]

P.P.S. When you go in print, then you want to save PostScript file - the program crashes.

Also when you to set print range - for example from 2 to 4 all done. Then you want to print entire range of the pages later - if you are in show details panel - to set and see more options - you may set again to entire document, this will not change any settings and you will again get the same 2 to 4th page to print. You have to go back and hide details and then set the pages to "entire document" there in the "simpler menu", hit print - And the program crashes so no print for me.

Same happens if you make the setting for shrink to printable - so I want to shrink the document to printable area - the program crashes.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Vorador

[fiëé]

I think you can’t expect those very old 8 bit PostScript fonts to work with a modern application – even if it would be nice.

As far as I know the different font technologies from TeX, you need a mapping of Type 1 encoding vectors to Unicode – OTF and not-too-old TTF fonts have their characters defined according to Unicode, but in PostScript the encoding depends on local settings to match those of the font. While some programs can handle those old fonts, especially if they stem from the 8 bit era themselves, I can’t blame modern programs to avoid that hassle of supporting outdated technology.

[Vorador]

4 hours ago, fiëé said:

I think you can’t expect those very old 8 bit PostScript fonts to work with a modern application – even if it would be nice.

As far as I know the different font technologies from TeX, you need a mapping of Type 1 encoding vectors to Unicode – OTF and not-too-old TTF fonts have their characters defined according to Unicode, but in PostScript the encoding depends on local settings to match those of the font. While some programs can handle those old fonts, especially if they stem from the 8 bit era themselves, I can’t blame modern programs to avoid that hassle of supporting outdated technology.

I will try to make the long story short as possible:

First point - I can, and I do expect, and it would be not just nice but it is required from the customers and in fact by the giants in the market that support it today and now. This is not outdated technology more than bitmaps and gifs. No one is talking about any 8 bit or any era (I do not remember in DOS to had ability to choose many things, and most printers where dot matrix or needle or thermal printing and had certain list of "fonts" if you can call them like that at all, but whatever maybe I am wrong).

The idea is that I do this for a living, and professionally you have requirements and standards placed in-front of you that you have to fulfill. And when I buy, I buy professional program that can fulfill them because with the requirements in-front of us, we designers also start having requirements and standards, and Affinity makes professional software, and they definitely can, and do take that corner from other giants more and more, and they do already make difference with software like Photo and Design. And to be honest many people want to get away from those other companies because of any many reasons that are not for this forum and thread.

We do not hassle Serif, because this is very young application - I bought it as soon as it got out, and as far as I bought anything from Serif - I see their policy of development and support and I know they will overcome this, just will need time, but also they have to know about it and it is our "turn" as users to inform and request fixing for bugs.

Next in point - certain font encoding does not work at some fonts and other are not recognized at all. And that is bug. And even if it shows something it happen to say "not supported symbol" but because the program decided something, however you cannot change the font form one to another because it returns back to the wrong font (seen in the font manager) and you have to go change it manually in for example 800 pages document, separated in files of 10 or 30 pages or whatever needed and if needed, and that is because you cannot change the font formatting automatically with "find and replace all", because the program crashes – and that is a bug.

You cannot just make program that will not support Cyrillic or Japanese or whatever encoding in fonts that have it and then to expect to be used worldwide, this drops quality and you loose market, and you do not want that...

Next in point - I do not want to give this example but if I must - look at the most modern program of InDesign CC something, and you will see them fonts very well supported. Look at the simple modern Word that is not even for professional publishing as far as I am concerned, and you will see them very well recognized and supported. To not expect backward compatibility leads to derivation of standards and quality loss of the end product, and that have bad ends. And also binds customers to continue to use the programs that support it regardless their needs and desires - that is to use other software. I might want to use Affinity in my work and not being able because it can't support certain fonts or encoding.

If it cannot open certain file format, that is copyrighted from another company – that is understandable, but if it cannot open properly a font that is building block so to say, and you bought it under license agreement that you have it to use it and no one can tell you with what program to do so - that is not.

Example - Quark Express was the leader long time ago but "this is old that is expired and the other one is not needed and... I can go all day like that" - and now newer versions cannot open even it's own older files, and they practically lost the game so far. No great many use that, what was the absolute leader and market standard back in the days.

I am not blaming anybody, it is just that if anyone want to make professional program that we use in our professional daily work, it must have certain features, because I cannot tell my clients that they cannot have something, because my program is not expected to support something because it is few years old.

Neither can I tell them that they have to give hundreds of dollars per font style for same font family that was bought already, because the program that I use does not support them. They will just go to other place or I will have to use different program. It is that simple. And I will be honest in that also - we want to move away from the subscriptions and other stuff of giants.

Let alone that from years I have never seen anything so rich in features, easy to use and supporting so many new things, so intuitive as Affinity Suite, neither those giants got out anything new that is worth all those tons of money, but if anyone wants to take that "bone" from the leaders and wants to make professional software - that software will have to have certain features "must have" so to say. Like for example hyphenation for more languages, dictionaries, font support etc. This are called standards, that is why corporations love so much the expression "Industry standard". It is required from us and they have to have proper compatibility. The things that I am talking about are not from 8 bit era at all. They are not from the 16 bit era or any era at all and it is not even backward compatibility, but for the benefit of doubt let us say it so -backward compatibility with fonts, it's old files and other such things.

With respect and best regards.

 

[MikeW]

12 minutes ago, Vorador said:

I will try to make the long story short as possible:

...

Example - Quark Express was the leader long time ago but "this is old that is expired and the other one is not needed and... I can go all day like that" - and now newer versions cannot open even it's own older files, and they practically lost the game so far. No great many use that, what was the absolute leader and market standard back in the days.

...

Neither can I tell them that they have to give hundreds of dollars per font style for same font family that was bought already, because the program that I use does not support them. They will just go to other place or I will have to use different program. It is that simple. And I will be honest in that also - we want to move away from the subscriptions and other stuff of giants.

...

I feel for you. Fonts can represent an incredible investment over the years. I would shudder if I actually tallied up how much I have spent since 1989. The sum would be bad for my heart...

As regards QXP opening its old files, I regularly open v.3.x through v.7 files. Yep, I need to use the Quark Document converter on them. The document converter is really QXP version 9 without its GUI interface. Which is causing some people using Macs running Catalina grief as it is a 32-bit application. Version 8 files and up there is no such issues (unless there are html layouts, which the document converter will strip out). Quark support will convert the files en masse for any current user, though. (Using the document converter on Windows there are no such issues.)

As regards Postscript Type 1 fonts...Adobe is ending support for them over the next couple years starting with Photoshop. Their other applications will follow suit. They do work in QXP, but I don't know whether they will take the Adobe position eventually or not.

PS Type 1 fonts can be easily converted to TrueType (or OTF but there is no benefit). The metrics should remain the same so old documents shouldn't reflow much if at all. I would recommend considering this conversion route.

Mike

[PaulEC]

16 minutes ago, Vorador said:

I cannot tell my clients that they cannot have something, because my program is not expected to support something because it is few years old.

This seems to me to be the really big problem. While we (the users of Affinity apps) may well appreciate the facts that Serif are a small company and that the Affinity apps are (comparatively) new, clients paying good money for a job to be done couldn't give a ******** ****! They just want their work done as they want it done and done now (not in a few years when Affinity catches up.)

I really look forward to the day when the Affinity apps will be a viable replacement for other software (that shall be nameless!), rather than something that (although I prefer to use it) can only be used alongside/with other software to do things that can't (yet?) be done in Affinity. 

[kenmcd]

2 hours ago, Vorador said:

because my program is not expected to support something because it is few years old.

"A few years old" ?
Adobe converted their entire font library to OpenType by 2002.
That is 18 years ago.

Adobe Photoshop support for Type 1 fonts ends this year.
That is Adobe telling their base it is time to move on.

Affinity has limited resources, and still has many features to add, and many bugs to fix.
Allocating programmers' precious time to support obsolete font technology makes no sense whatsoever.

I understand the frustration due to the big investment some people have in these old fonts.
But the writing has been on the wall for years.
Time to bite the bullet and make the transition.

Excellent font conversion software is available for under $100.
That should soften the blow and give people some time to replace their font libraries.

As far as newer applications like APub adding support for old obsolete font technology - never going to happen.

 

[Vorador]

12 hours ago, MikeW said:

I feel for you. Fonts can represent an incredible investment over the years. I would shudder if I actually tallied up how much I have spent since 1989. The sum would be bad for my heart...

As regards QXP opening its old files, I regularly open v.3.x through v.7 files. Yep, I need to use the Quark Document converter on them. The document converter is really QXP version 9 without its GUI interface. Which is causing some people using Macs running Catalina grief as it is a 32-bit application. Version 8 files and up there is no such issues (unless there are html layouts, which the document converter will strip out). Quark support will convert the files en masse for any current user, though. (Using the document converter on Windows there are no such issues.)

As regards Postscript Type 1 fonts...Adobe is ending support for them over the next couple years starting with Photoshop. Their other applications will follow suit. They do work in QXP, but I don't know whether they will take the Adobe position eventually or not.

PS Type 1 fonts can be easily converted to TrueType (or OTF but there is no benefit). The metrics should remain the same so old documents shouldn't reflow much if at all. I would recommend considering this conversion route.

Mike

Oh God, yes you described it short to the point and I feel for you too. I passed through some of this before abandoning the idea at all, and I know what pain this is when you have a lot of work to do having 31 years of work behind you. Respect. Never-mind that the OS stops supporting programs "because they are making transition" (for more buggy and incompetent operating system but that is another topic). As for the QXP support - I do not see how I will send to them volumes of files that they can poke in just to convert them.

Do not get me wrong, some clients really do not like that idea at all, and we are not talking even for my collections - we are talking for publishers with a lot of production and a lot of resources spent. And they are the ones who have alternatives and request from us to have such.

Another thing is the Fonts conversion - font converter may be good idea, but when we use the fonts we are bind with ELUA specific for every and each one that may be violated when we convert them because it is forbidden to modify or something else.

Do you know if converting is not violation and you are given the right to convert the font, I mean If you can shed light on this I will be obliged.

Can you recommend some good converter to me?

By the way - Publisher already has the features and support for those fonts, it is not like it does not know what is this, and the fonts are working perfectly in their Western encoding for example - the encoding of Cyrillic and as far as I found some Asian encodings also is not working properly, it is just when it sees Cyrillic it goes nuts that is all. So that is why I posted here...

Best regards.

 

[Vorador]

13 hours ago, PaulEC said:

This seems to me to be the really big problem. While we (the users of Affinity apps) may well appreciate the facts that Serif are a small company and that the Affinity apps are (comparatively) new, clients paying good money for a job to be done couldn't give a ******** ****! They just want their work done as they want it done and done now (not in a few years when Affinity catches up.)

I really look forward to the day when the Affinity apps will be a viable replacement for other software (that shall be nameless!), rather than something that (although I prefer to use it) can only be used alongside/with other software to do things that can't (yet?) be done in Affinity. 

True story and you are completely right, and I cannot blame the client for that. Things cannot wait. And If we cannot get the job done then other people will.

Publisher is recognizing the fonts, it have problem with encoding, PS1 was example font. And saving in post script file is not something missing or old either. I saw threads from people with Asian language encodings, that had that same problem. It is just a bug that have to be fixed. And when noted I posted here.

Best regards.

[Vorador]

14 hours ago, LibreTraining said:

"A few years old" ?
Adobe converted their entire font library to OpenType by 2002.
That is 18 years ago.

Adobe Photoshop support for Type 1 fonts ends this year.
That is Adobe telling their base it is time to move on.

Affinity has limited resources, and still has many features to add, and many bugs to fix.
Allocating programmers' precious time to support obsolete font technology makes no sense whatsoever.

I understand the frustration due to the big investment some people have in these old fonts.
But the writing has been on the wall for years.
Time to bite the bullet and make the transition.

Excellent font conversion software is available for under $100.
That should soften the blow and give people some time to replace their font libraries.

As far as newer applications like APub adding support for old obsolete font technology - never going to happen.

 

 

Your passion on the subject is admirable, very appreciated but utterly misplaced.

Read the thread not the last comment to hook up on it...

Sometimes I ask myself how many people read the entire or at least the initial problem paragraph of the topic to the point when they post something and why they keep such "interesting" attitude towards others. First it was 8 bit era now it is 18 years old and we bite bullets and make transitions while someone writes on the wall. Also I advise against making excuses or assumptions on other companies account. Serif will fix it in time because they are the cool guys, and they know that if you make professional software you have to make it, no one cares if you have all the resources or no resources at all, if they gave you the money and your program is not working properly. Period. And they know it and it is our responsibility to tell them the bugs and request features.

Read the thread.

Affinity Publisher already have those features I am talking about and that is why I called it a bug, because they are not working properly. Also I said something for the professional software that I see they already make, and what is crashing and not working. Read the thread. Because we are talking about professional publishing of publications not about my collection or the blows I take... Neither do I know many hobbyist publishing magazines and books.

What you are de-facto advising is that we continue to stick with the good old stuff until we can because no one is obliged to make things right and we should not buy new software because it is not required to work properly. This is not healthy. There is no progress in that. I already have that.

That post script font is called example and I tried to be specific with at least one example, so the only people who haven't answered yet AT ALL, can identify and see what is the problem. Not only that but I added more comments as I have explored the problems with my not properly working program that are not even font related at all, instead of me just complaining, so it can be easier for them.

I do not know "what is never going to happen" either – it is not mine case only, I go through forums when I have problem and saw posts from Taiwan with their encoding and font problems also if I recall properly.

Now obviously we have problems with the encoding of the fonts and not the fonts themselves, should we go check Taiwan fonts also? ...nah Taiwan is old...

Tell some of the biggest publishers that they have to bite the bullet, ride the tide and make transition with their entire font libraries of billions in production files and billions costs that are not really conceivable by most people. I do not believe that this will soften any blow, not now, not ever.

The fact however is that Publisher already have support but it is not working properly, that is why I called it a bug. Also this is not my old cassette recorder that I am looking for parts because I love vintage stuff, it is not 8 or 16 bit program that I try to run on 64 bit OS. Even Windows and Word have support for these. A chat client can have support for these. And chat client is for chatting not for professional publishing.

I do not know what writes on walls and what bullets or whatever some people bite, nor do I care for their transitions, but here it is - the features I described are there, and not working properly as it was described regardless that they are already there, ALREADY THERE.

Read the tread.

Here is something more that is not the topic neither the thread:

Whatever Ado** abandoned, it is not in their favor, that is the reason we want to move somewhere else. A product does not dictate the market, the market demands the product when we are talking about this type of software. It is a tool. And this is not the topic.

This started to look like stupid social network, not a bug topic. What is this Twee*** or Faceb***? I am expecting someone from Affinity to pay some constructive attention and to say go/no-go on that not to be told that I must tell the customers that their requirements are old and irrelevant because we are modern now...

As for the software company that I do not want to name, If we are looking for substitute – than the things for them are clear enough and I will not loose my time to debate that.

Because these are new "type of technology" and others are "obsolete font technology" totally irrelevant, working the same way, doing absolutely the same thing, but let us change them so they can take ton more money again for the same old stuff.

And by We I mean we who do not approve that. Not single man, not single company, because otherwise this will not be – nor needed neither required software or conversation. We will just sit where we are.

This is why we want to call Affinity our new tool-set.

Tell me what is the difference in between new and old " obsolete font technology " how better is it for us to use because of... plot, I want to know the practical difference. I personally never understood people who are being denied something and they defend that point of view as "moving forward to better future... because of plot". Absence of something must be filled with something else with the same or better value, otherwise absence of something is not benefit. It is Absence. And this is not better. But as I said it is already there, just not working properly. Okay here we have some of the topic at the last row.

Do you by the way consider when using font converter, that you as a user who uses those fonts bought buy you or your client client request, you are LEGALLY BIND by End User License Agreement aka EULA that says that you may or may not modify and do other stuff with these fonts (specific for every and each font, picture, whatever resource) and you may or may not be given freedom to do so and you are responsible to the full extent of the law for what you do?

The problem is QUOTE:

" My first and main problem now is that Cyrillic encoding for fonts are not properly recognized and give error message of "Unsupported characters used" unless the font is .OTF - so no post script for example.

Interestingly enough, when I try to use find and replace function - the replace all leads to Crash.

Also had to restart the machine, because font manager decided that it will always put same font to substitute no matter what I choose. Had to reset from miscellaneous the program and then to reset the computer. The program still remember the fonts but not the UI settings.

When you go in print, then you want to save PostScript file - the program crashes.

Also when you to set print range - for example from 2 to 4 all done. Then you want to print entire range of the pages later - if you are in show details panel - to set and see more options - you may set again to entire document, this will not change any settings and you will again get the same 2 to 4th page to print. You have to go back and hide details and then set the pages to "entire document" there in the "simpler menu", hit print - And the program crashes so no print for me.

Same happens if you make the setting for shrink to printable - so I want to shrink the document to printable area - the program crashes."

END OF QUOTE. So no one says that my PS1 font is not recognized and the program is scratching it's bald head "What the hell is that?"

I also stated that the Cyrillic encoding is not working, it is in this famous font example - for the same old 18 years obsolete, 8 bit abandoned, prehistoric, Jurassic, fully aged, fossilized, rotten, dug-in and then dug-out after 9 million years of smelly stinky fermentation – the western encoding of any font is working perfectly. As I said the font manager returns back the old one that it claims is improper font and you cannot really change the font to new "transitioned" one. How old is auto-replace feature that does not auto-replace the so old prehistoric stone-age font formatting with modern one because the program crashes?

Read the thread.

[kenmcd]

Wow. Quite the rant.
But, it does not change my opinion.
It is highly unlikely a Cyrillic encoding issue with Type 1 fonts is going to get pushed to the top of the ToDo list.
Far more issues with a bigger payoff for more users will more likely have a greater priority.

But what do I know ...
Perhaps they will fix it tomorrow.
Dunno.