Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Pyanepsion said:

LondonSquirrel, please tell us what is the real reason why you defend this nonsense against all odds.

You seem to have a very particular bee in your bonnet about variable fonts. I have other needs before variable fonts. I have managed without variable fonts until now. They seem to be aimed to web site development, which Affinity is currently not.

What is 'against all odds' nonsense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

That's not how I checked. If I go to Google and search for variable fonts, the top hits are related to using them in CSS. A typical sample from Google itself: 'For its first 20 years, the web had a problem with typography.'

You’ve actually been tricked by Google.
In order to better sell your personal data, this search engine first shows you what matches your interests, then those of other searchers on the data server you depend on. This is the same principle that makes social network users believe that their very marginal opinion is in the majority.

16 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

You seem to have a very particular bee in your bonnet about variable fonts.

Everyone has understood that you do not use variable fonts or Opentype collections. Their main advantage is, of course, to reduce the total weight of a font family and this makes them adopted since their creation in 2016 by the Internet world.

In DTP, it’s been slower, because we often only use a few different fonts in a document, and DTP software has been a little slow to implement them unlike Internet software. In the last couple of years, there has been a growing interest in DTP in this new technique, because many agencies are doing both print and screen, and also because with these fonts, most of the restrictions of DTP are minimized.

In addition, many forges often offer only these formats, which further speeds up the process…

6 cœurs, 12 processus Windows 11 pro, 64 bits   Affinity Desktop Publisher, Affinity Desktop Designer, Affinity Desktop Photo.

Mais je vous le demande, peut-on imaginer une police sans sérifs ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pyanepsion said:

You’ve actually been tricked by Google.

No I haven't. As I have not searched for variable fonts before, Google has no idea what I want when I search for variable fonts.

8 minutes ago, Pyanepsion said:

In DTP, it’s been slower, because we often only use a few different fonts in a document,

So why did you write that 'It’s about time Serif realized that fonts are a key part of desktop publishing'? Affinity does not (yet) make apps for web site development. You know this. So why are you asking why Affinity does not support web site technologies?

I have seen barely any interest in variable fonts for DTP. Brief searches on a search engine of your choice will confirm this. Lots of results for how to use variable fonts on web sites, in CSS, yes. But not in DTP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

That's not how I checked. If I go to Google and search for variable fonts, the top hits are related to using them in CSS.

They talked about such fonts in the 90', and it take them 20-30 years to begin working together and try to find a substitute to fonts problems (a lot of files and versions, with different encodings depending on your location, etc.). 

I read articles about them or the main idea when I was a student, and I'm happy to see them coming now.

Especially when OS are completely modified et won't support older fonts for long. It'll be a huge investment, but it means that people won't suffer the different problems we had with font dues to encoding, font versions, corrupted fonts, etc. It'll be simpler.

And we'll have choices, and the typography won't be anymore the "poor relation" ("parent pauvre" in French, the neglected one everyone despise or ignore) in design, with only regular/bold/italic/bold italic.

It'll also be easier to create designs, without needing to discard a lovely font because it's only got the 4 basics variants and you need more.

 

It'll take time, but it'll be better.

And it won't make us font designers! We'll simply use the options or values available in the font, as designed by its creator, nothing more.

 

39 minutes ago, LondonSquirrel said:

A typical sample from Google itself: 'For its first 20 years, the web had a problem with typography.' 

Since Internet came in the 90', and it wasn't possible to easily  include fonts — bandwidth was a real problem, and fonts are heavy —, it was simplest to use the commun fonts installed on each OS. Yes, there was a problem since most interesting or differents fonts were simply images. At least for headers. Or more... in tables!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LondonSquirrel Reading you, the impression is rather strange. It is as if, since the Affinity suite does not yet support variable fonts or font collections, you would have to argue strongly that variable fonts and font collections are of no use in print. This reasoning is far from sound. It is also far removed from reality.

Put simply, most text, design and DTP programs support variable fonts and font collections. But the Affinity suite does not yet.

6 cœurs, 12 processus Windows 11 pro, 64 bits   Affinity Desktop Publisher, Affinity Desktop Designer, Affinity Desktop Photo.

Mais je vous le demande, peut-on imaginer une police sans sérifs ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pyanepsion said:

It is also far removed from reality.

Can you post a few links to web sites indicating using variable fonts for desktop publishing? As mentioned, I searched. What I saw was variable fonts for web use. Perhaps variable fonts are used for desktop publishing, but Google doesn't seem to know about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/7/2022 at 5:43 PM, Wosven said:

I Don't think just looking at a page/book/magazine, you can determine if it's a variable font or not...

Bear in mind that the variable font standard was built on Adobe’s Multiple Master and Apple’s TrueType GX formats, both developed in the mid-nineties for print applications. The point of using variable fonts in print (as with MM and TTGX) is the precision and control they provide across the range of axes (weight, optical size, width etc.) and so they can be co-ordinated with fonts used on the web. I‘ve set out some of the arguments for the former, but it‘s also worth considering the latter. Increasingly print and digital projects are intended to go hand-in-hand — printed documents link to websites, websites provide PDFs, etc. It doesn‘t make any sense having different fonts, and font formats, across different media. Variable fonts also conveniently bundle all of the variations within the font into one file.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jamessouttar said:

Bear in mind that the variable font standard was built on Adobe’s Multiple Master and Apple’s TrueType GX formats, both developed in the mid-nineties for print applications.

It also happens to be something of a simplification (reduction) of the type of flexibility that was offered by the even older MetaFont technology originally developed along with TeX.

There are some potential applications in the world of animation too (if the parameters can have keyframes assigned to them to vary them over time), so personally I'm hoping for more motion graphics software to start providing better support for them at some point...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LondonSquirrel said:

Can you post a few links to web sites indicating using variable fonts for desktop publishing?

Here's one from the a site I read sometimes for various layout questions:

https://creativepro.com/variable-fonts-in-indesign/

This article requires a subscription to see more than the intro, but in any case it is an example article about the feature when it was new to InDesign. CreativePro was formerly known as InDesignSecrets.com 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, jamessouttar said:

Bear in mind that the variable font standard was built on Adobe’s Multiple Master and Apple’s TrueType GX formats, both developed in the mid-nineties for print applications. The point of using variable fonts in print (as with MM and TTGX) is the precision and control they provide across the range of axes (weight, optical size, width etc.) and so they can be co-ordinated with fonts used on the web. I‘ve set out some of the arguments for the former, but it‘s also worth considering the latter. Increasingly print and digital projects are intended to go hand-in-hand — printed documents link to websites, websites provide PDFs, etc. It doesn‘t make any sense having different fonts, and font formats, across different media. Variable fonts also conveniently bundle all of the variations within the font into one file.

Don't forget the copyright factor. If itwasas simple as downloading usable fonts for print as downloading them from sites using them, we would go back to the 90', when a lot of people had hundreds or thouthands of fonts freely and without paying anything, since we usually shared working files instead of PDF.

That's why since the 2000 years, Adobe and other companies did a lot of warning and checking to ensure people get the licences for the fonts they used. At the time I worked in a small compagny, and we had to delete most of our fonts and do from scratch, and we just could buy ± 20 font families with the "big" money allocated by our boss. At the same time, founderies sold also bundles, and it was a good thing, or we would have been fed up working with so few fonts and not being able to do what the clients asked for.

Today, some companies are specialised to check fonts in magazines, and asked/checked with the editors to provide the licences. Especially in the market for children, where we tend to use lot of different ones.

 

When needing to update computers, apps, fonts and licences, it's easier to decide when you have few of them than a lot, since the price is really different. We began to work on this few years ago, and Covid and other problems arise… Questions where about using services like Typekit, buying fonts depending of need or punctually, etc. In big companies, there's also other tools needed, for managing the magazines's workflow, archiving, viewing, etc. It's certainly easier to manage "few" font files using variables ones, than a huge library with lot of files, for PC and OS X, etc.

 

"One file for all usages" would be a dream on our side*, but perhaps not for the foundries. I don't know,  I didn't check the last evolutions of this.

 

* But prices are different depending on usage, quantities, time, etc., perhaps having different formats help them keep track of this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/10/2022 at 3:15 PM, Wosven said:

When needing to update computers, apps, fonts and licences, it's easier to decide when you have few of them than a lot, since the price is really different. We began to work on this few years ago, and Covid and other problems arise… Questions where about using services like Typekit, buying fonts depending of need or punctually, etc. In big companies, there's also other tools needed, for managing the magazines's workflow, archiving, viewing, etc. It's certainly easier to manage "few" font files using variables ones, than a huge library with lot of files, for PC and OS X, etc.

Indeed. But many font vendors offer print and webfonts as an either/or/both option, along with licences for other applications, such as apps (MyFonts being the biggest of these). Variable fonts can be in .ttf, .woff and .woff2 formats (as well as .cff2, but this is currently not well supported). Typically one would install the .ttf on devices where one is using the font (e.g. for print) and the .woff or .woff2 format on web servers. This is the same whether one is using static or variable fonts. Variable fonts are just easier to keep track of, since there are one or two files (usually depending on whether roman and italics are included in a single font, or split).

Again, though, I will emphasise that I’m not advocating for variable fonts as a good idea. Variable fonts are happening. They are being driven by the web, but they are beneficial to designers working in physical media as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/10/2022 at 1:09 PM, LondonSquirrel said:

How do PDFs handle variable fonts?

You might remember that the first incarnation of variable fonts, Adobe‘s Multiple Master format, was developed for PDFs. Two families, based on Myriad and Minion, were used to substitute fonts that were not embedded. Since MM fonts were variable, Acrobat produced instances of the fonts on the fly to match the width and weight of the font. Twenty-eight years later, this is still how Acrobat handles substitutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jamessouttar said:

You might remember that the first incarnation of variable fonts, Adobe‘s Multiple Master format, was developed for PDFs. Two families, based on Myriad and Minion, were used to substitute fonts that were not embedded. Since MM fonts were variable, Acrobat produced instances of the fonts on the fly to match the width and weight of the font. Twenty-eight years later, this is still how Acrobat handles substitutions.

That wasn't really my question. I have heard of multiple master fonts, but never used them. I'm asking what happens today if you export a PDF from an app which supports variable fonts? How do the fonts appear in the PDF? Because PDF does not actually support variable fonts (according to Adobe). So all this talk of one font for all uses seems very moot if you cannot actually use all those custom weights/slants/etc in PDF. 

Edited by LondonSquirrel
I corrected a couple of bone-headed typos.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 2/20/2022 at 4:46 PM, LondonSquirrel said:

That wasn't really my question. I have heard of multiple master fonts, but never used them. I'm asking what happens today if you export a PDF from an app which supports variable fonts? How do the fonts appear in the PDF? Because PDF does not actually support variable fonts (according to Adobe). So all this talk of one font for all uses seems very moot if you cannot actually use all those custom weights/slants/etc in PDF. 

Currently, if you export a PDF with variable fonts from InDesign, the software creates static instances of the variable font according to they choices you made. PDF doesn‘t currently offer native support for variable fonts — meaning that the whole font is embedded and remains editable. Adobe don‘t forsee that happening for some time. But as long as the conversion from variable font to font instances works, this is not really an issue. In any case, because of its lack of accessibility, PDF is increasingly being seen as a legacy format. It’s fine as an interchange format for printed documents, but it‘s far from ideal for digital publishing. Given the nature of the PostScript language, which is the very opposite of semantic coding, it‘s hard to see how Adobe could address this (but they still have Framemaker, and perhaps XML and DITA will ultimately become a replacement for PDF).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jamessouttar said:

In any case, because of its lack of accessibility, PDF

I thought PDF had gained accessibility features?

 

-- Walt

   Desktop: new:  Windows 11 Home, version 21H2 (22000.613) 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090  (old: 16GB memory, Intel Core i7-6700K @ 4.00GHz, GeForce GTX 970 )
   Laptop:  Windows 10 Home, version 21H2 (19044.1706) 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
    Affinity Photo 1.10.5 (.1342) and 1.10.5.1342 Beta   / Affinity Designer 1.10.5 (.1342) and 1.10.5.1342 Beta  / Affinity Publisher 1.10.5 (.1342) and 1.10.5.1282 Beta
 iPad Pro M1, 12.9", iPadOS 15.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard

  Affinity Photo 1.10.5 (.280) and 1.10.2 (.266) Beta / Affinity Designer 1.10.5 (.21) and 1.10.3 (.19) Beta 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/11/2022 at 11:50 AM, walt.farrell said:

I thought PDF had gained accessibility features?

 

Yes, but that‘s the point. PDF has been made more accessible, but this requires adding accessibility features through Acrobat Pro, and exporting an Accessible PDF. That‘s certainly something to celebrate. Nonetheless it contrasts poorly with the Semantic Markup approach which is implicit in markup languages such as SGML, HTML and XML (and even Markdown). PostScript is a page description language, and its primary concern is where things are on a page, and how they look, rather than what they are. That‘s why when one imports a PDF into, for instance, Designer, text can be broken up into separate segments (and why Designer has to try to reassemble paragraphs) — it‘s not together, as a semantic entity, in the original file.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Figma now has support for RTL fonts (for Arabic, Persian, Urdu, Hebrew etc.) and has supported variable fonts — through a plug-in — for some time already. Over the last few years I’ve been a big Affinity fan, and supporter, but Affinity is slipping behind when it comes to typography (there are still some rough edges with font support, especially for those with lots of alternatives and contextual features). Type is central to what most of us use Affinity applications for (especially Publisher) and I’d like to see their type handling be ahead of the curve, rather than perpetually languishing behind it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, jamessouttar said:

Figma

... is valued at $14 billion. I don't know how much Serif is valued at, but I guess it's not at that level.

While there is a free tier available for Figma, it is limited to three Figma files. It would be fairer to compare the Figma Professional tier to Serif's offerings. It's $12 a month, $144 a year, and so on. I've had AD since 2014. If I had had Figma that length of time it would have cost me $1152 at today's price. Instead I paid £27.99 to buy AD from the App store.

I had a quick look at Figma last night. Its RTL offering is rudimentary, sufficient for short snippets but not suitable for longer texts. I already have a workaround for this sort of RTL text. Figma's fully justified RTL text is also not suitable - there are no kashidas, for example. I attach a sample PDF. The first two lines of right aligned text are acceptable but not better than what I can currently do. The next two lines are fully justified and are not very good.  I do see this sort of justification in some RTL books but it is not very common. So Figma is not a RTL solution for me. Other people may find it suitable.

I agree that type is (or should be) central to APub (and probably AD). It's less important in APhoto. 

rtl-test-1.pdf

Edited by LondonSquirrel
Attached PDF from Figma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

+1 to add variable font support across the range of apps, starting with desktop.

I'm having to seriously consider abandoning Affinity apps and returning to Adobe Creative Cloud apps. I love Affinity apps but variable fonts aren't just a novelty any more.

Edited by Peter Martin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I have been given a single file from any design house with variable fonts. Of course my experience is anecdotal but I am in no way panicked for variable fonts. I like the idea of them, but have never felt a need to really get beyond the standard font families that have thin, light, regular, medium, semi bold, bold, black. Even then most fonts do not have that entire set, they might be light, regular and bold. I wonder what the real difference is between want and need here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.