Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

optical alignment


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, thomaso said:

Again and again: Spacing within words is NOT what you call "optical margin alignment".

Again and again: We did not say that they are the same.

 

22 hours ago, thomaso said:

Heute sind "setzen", "Satz" und "Setzer" obsolet in ihrem ursprünglichen Sinn.

Trotzdem setzt man heute noch. Leider mit zunehmender schlechter Qualität, weil Programme behaupten, Aufgaben zu erledigen, die sie leider nicht erledigen. Leider fallen darauf zu viele Laien und sogar sogenannte Profis herein. Gute Satzqualität erreicht man in Ihrem obigen Beispiel erst mit zusätzlichem Aufwand und Wissen. Optisch ausgeglichen ist da nix. Weder horizontal noch vertikal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Oval said:

All the pictures show that even users that seem to know what they do, do not get correct results.

dfgdes.jpg.5fd03a27a43deab5df927f6064d621a1.jpg

Mike even had no time to set only four letters visually correct. So how should this be economical, if you have to work out huge tables for every font, every used letter and finally different styles and sizes?! Impossible! Especially not for laymen. This optical alignment does not work in real life! (The letters are not even based on pictures and graphic elements that are in the grid.)

No, I did 115 characters contained in 7 classes in 2 minutes. Like I mentioned, I only did X% of the uppercase and none of the lowercase (like you seem to want to point out in your redo of my screen shot) because this feature is not one I will likely support in my fonts. How much "overshoot" one likes is really up to the layout person. 

My main issue with making it happen within the font itself is just that: I may not have enough overshoot for some people and too much for others. In this regard it is like kerning. The font designer may be happy with the kerning in one of their fonts, but the layout designer may want to set the text looser or tighter. In the same way as regards including OMA in my fonts, I would have to make decisions in the font that some people would find OK, others not OK.

So APub's ability for the layout person to edit those values in the Manual setting are, for me, the best option. It only takes a few minutes to edit the tables, add, delete or change the existing values for the pre-done characters.

As regards adding in more classes for the uppercase and adding in the lowercase classes would take me a grand total of perhaps a half-hour and then using the Font setting would be more appealing.

But even so, why should I bother since APub's Manual setting is what I would rather use myself?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, MikeW said:

the Manual setting are, for me, the best option

We don’t want to discuss your best option, kerning and editing hundreds and thousand of values, that would be needed, but it shows that you even had no time to bring the “A” and the “E” on one optical line. Your picture shows that the manual options don’t work for many users: there is no correct optical margin alignment!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Oval said:

We don’t want to discuss your best option, kerning and editing hundreds and thousand of values, that would be needed, but it shows that you even had no time to bring the “A” and the “E” on one optical line. Your picture shows that the manual options don’t work for many users: there is no correct optical margin alignment!

You either really have no idea what is involved in setting OMA, how InDesign even works with OMA or are simply (and purposefully) being obtuse.

I have not done a screen shot of the Manual option. I've only done a screen shot of OMA when a font has it set and in APub using the Font option.

Here's are two screen shots. One from APub and one from InDesign.

APub:

capture-002376.png.850b993cbc4745ac7a1fe8155af07f06.png

 

And InDesign. Note that InDesign cannot read the OMA from a font. So this is ID's built-in (and stupid) OMA.

capture-002377.png.c93242bfd08a869610a2874e510aec9d.png

Note that ID doesn't move the caps C & S over and it should. The A is set way too far out. N & U should be moved out a bit.

I believe that on the Font setting when a font has this OpenType Feature in it, it produces superior results.

Also note that what I did in my font can absolutely be reproduced in minutes in APub when it is set to Manual.

This will be my last post on this subject. Please refer to my first paragraph in this post as to why.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MikeW said:

You either really have no idea what is involved in setting OMA, how InDesign even works with OMA or are simply (and purposefully) being obtuse.

@Oval started this topic talking about Optical Margin Alignment, then midway through switched to talking about kerning, Mike.

And seems insistent on continuing to talk about automatic optical kerning even though the topic is supposed to be about OMA. It really should have been two topics.

-- Walt
Designer, Photo, and Publisher V1 and V2 at latest retail and beta releases
PC:
    Desktop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 

    Laptop:  Windows 11 Pro, version 23H2, 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
iPad:  iPad Pro M1, 12.9": iPadOS 17.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard 
Mac:  2023 M2 MacBook Air 15", 16GB memory, macOS Sonoma 14.4.1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MikeW said:

this is ID's built-in (and stupid) OMA.

And we even don’t want to discuss other apps here. We want a solution that works for all. Really stupid, that you have to create thousand of values that an algorithm could do. This is not a feature for most users. We will see more and more bad margins because users think it works. Terrible, that one presents such a thing here at all: the C optically too far outside, the N too far right, the kerning completely ill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/18/2018 at 6:35 PM, Oval said:
       
         On 12/17/2018 at 8:31 PM, thomaso said:

         Again and again: Spacing within words is NOT what you call "optical margin alignment".



Again and again: We did not say that they are the same.

That you bounce between the meanings of kerning and optical alignment arbitrarily  – by using one argument of one as an argument for the other – makes it hard to follow your idea and to communicate with you.

 

On 12/18/2018 at 6:35 PM, Oval said:

weil Programme behaupten, Aufgaben zu erledigen, die sie leider nicht erledigen.

Hm? Bezieht sich das auf APublisher? Welche Behauptung?

APub bietet für "Optical Alignment" drei Möglichkeiten an. Bei keiner erledigt das Programm die Aufgabe oder behauptet es zu tun, sondern setzt lediglich Vorgaben des Anwenders bzw. der Font-Datei um. ("Manual" oder "Font").
 

On 12/18/2018 at 6:35 PM, Oval said:

 Satzqualität erreicht man in Ihrem obigen Beispiel erst mit zusätzlichem Aufwand und Wissen. Optisch ausgeglichen ist da nix.

Jedenfalls findet beim Wechsel von "None" zu "Font" ein deutlicher Ausgleich statt.

Ob schön, gut oder richtig ist eine andere Frage, die zu diskutieren aber hier keinen Sinn hat, da sich das Programm offenbar weniger an anspruchsvolle Typographen richtet, sondern eher einen Massenmarkt zu erzielen scheint. Mikro-Typographie wie der optische Randausgleich würden nur von einem Bruchteil der Anwender verstanden und von Lesern der Endprodukte kaum wahrgenommen werden, in Anbetracht der zunehmenden Menge an schlampig–hastigen Onlinemedien. Ich stimme dir zu, dass die Entwicklung zu bedauern ist – aber sie ist vollzogen und erstmal unumkehrbar. Vieles wird heute gar nicht mehr unterrichtet. Trotzdem macht es auch mir Vergnügen, in die Lehr- und Bilderbücher eines Albert Kapr einzutauchen, und das Wissen anzuwenden, wo Zeit und Geld es erlauben.

macOS 10.14.6 | MacBookPro Retina 15" | Eizo 27" | Affinity V1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, thomaso said:

aber sie ist vollzogen und erstmal unumkehrbar

Sehr traurige Einstellung. Trifft wahrscheinlich auch auf die Klimaänderung zu. 

 

10 minutes ago, thomaso said:

by using one argument of one as an argument for the other

It is the same argument: Serif publishes half-baked stuff. Every time we see that “AFFNTY” on top, we can’t believe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, thomaso said:

Welche Behauptung?

Nur ein Beispiel: Es bedurfte großer Anstrengungen, Serif dazu zu bewegen, die grundsätzlichen Fehler im Rundsatzalgorithmus zu beheben. Mit dem sogenannten optischen Randausgleich, der für ein korrektes Funktionieren keine festgelegten Werte nutzen sollte, wird es wohl dank fehlender Kapazitäten (hoppla, zweideutig) nicht so bald besser werden. Man hofft da auf Designer, die die Schriften entsprechend ausstatten, nur weil man sich scheut, die Sache grundsätzlich zu lösen und damit Standards zu setzen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Oval said:

Sehr traurige Einstellung. Trifft wahrscheinlich auch auf die Klimaänderung zu. 

Mehr Beobachtung als Einstellung im Sinn von Haltung oder Meinung. Wie beim Klima.

 

41 minutes ago, Oval said:

Serif publishes half-baked stuff.

(...) dank fehlender Kapazitäten (hoppla, zweideutig) nicht so bald besser werden. Man hofft da auf Designer, die die Schriften entsprechend ausstatten, nur weil man sich scheut, die Sache grundsätzlich zu lösen und damit Standards zu setzen.

Relative "Full-baked": some users (and/or stakeholder) like it medium, some prefer it bloody. Detailed versus quick'n'dirty. Rich or poor. Look, what InDesign had offered in its first days & $: http://web.archive.org/web/20000510205719/http://www.adobe.com:80/store/products/indesign.html

"Nur weil man sich scheut" klingt weit aus dem Fenster gelehnt – wegen "nur".

Der Kostendruck (= Konkurrenz) ist heute ein anderer als vor z.B. 20 Jahren. Das Miet-Modell ist ein Indikator dafür, dass eine Software-Schmiede schon alles getan hat, wozu sie Kapazitäten hat. Bei Serif kann man noch kaufen – statt mieten. Freu' dich, solange es so ist.

macOS 10.14.6 | MacBookPro Retina 15" | Eizo 27" | Affinity V1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Oval said:

Every time we see that “AFFNTY” on top, we can’t believe it. 

“AFFNTY” – good point! But for both positions, since it includes "time" in this way of reading. Perfect, so-to-say, prfct.

p.s.: who is "we" in you?
May i get more info from Oval about those, who might been involved in this:

1 hour ago, Oval said:

Es bedurfte großer Anstrengungen, Serif dazu zu bewegen, die grundsätzlichen Fehler im Rundsatzalgorithmus zu beheben. 

 

macOS 10.14.6 | MacBookPro Retina 15" | Eizo 27" | Affinity V1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, thomaso said:

AFFNTY” – good point! But for both positions, since it includes "time" in this way of reading. Perfect, so-to-say, prfct.

Can you read this?

Alfred spacer.png
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 2 for Windows • Windows 10 Home/Pro
Affinity Designer/Photo/Publisher 2 for iPad • iPadOS 17.4.1 (iPad 7th gen)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oilfried, (€lfr€d?),

such is even easier accessible in German and Arabic: there you can just write a text without any vocals, but it remains understandable. Whereby Arabic is used to it every day (unlike German): there it is very common not to write any vocals at all (which would only occure as tiny strokes above consonants).

Things to do: audible margin alignment ... ?

[ or slim optical alignment: without the need for "e" as in https://archive.org/details/Gadsby/page/n17 ]

macOS 10.14.6 | MacBookPro Retina 15" | Eizo 27" | Affinity V1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19. Dezember 2018 at 10:08 PM, thomaso said:

Der Kostendruck

Geld dürfte genug vorhanden sein und selbst wenn nicht, gäbe es genug Kapital. Aber wenn man bei Erscheinungsbild und Programmierung nicht immer Wert auf Qualität legt, muss die Qualitätsprüfung offenbar der User hier im Forum übernehmen. Im Nachhinein benötigt man allerdings sehr viel mehr Aufwand, um Fehler zu beseitigen, die im Vorfeld erst gar nicht passiert wären. Aber wird dann beispielsweise Fehlkommunikation, schlechte Gestaltung und Programmierung kritisiert, dann werden User hier mächtig unter Druck gesetzt. Vier Beispiele: fehlerbehaftetes Expand Stroke, Logoqualität, pica und APu-Launch-Ankündigungen. Hätte man alles von Anfang an korrekt umsetzen können. Beispielsweise mit belastbarem Konzept und Profis, die man auch mieten kann. Die für alle sichtbare Fehlleistung wie “AFFNTY” zeigt tagtäglich, dass man den Ansprüchen, die man bisher kommuniziert hat, nicht genügen will. Korrigiert wäre sie sehr schnell. Furchtbar, dass man dann auch noch solche Thesen von MikeW lesen muss, dass eine besonders schlecht ausgeglichene Wortmarke nur auf die ungenügenden Kerning-Werte des Fonts zurückzuführen sei. Wohlmöglich glauben ihm das dann auch noch die Moderatoren und Gestalter von Serif. Und solche Diskussionen um Adobe und Fleischgarpunkte lenken nur vom eigentlichen Thema Weißraumgewichtung ab: Weder beim horizontalen Zeichenausgleich noch beim vertikalen Randausgleich wollte man eine für alle Anwender praktikable Lösung diskutieren. Das manuelle Nacharbeiten von Tausenden Werten ist nicht praktikabel, zumal es ja offenbar nicht jeder beherrscht.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16. Dezember 2018 at 8:33 PM, NCTQ said:

Wow. Nobody else cares about "Optical Margin Alignment"? That's discouraging.

Oh, we did not realize that it took more than three months for Serif to ignore us by responding to somebody else. Maybe we are already used to it. ;-) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 4 months later...

Optical kerning as we know it from InDesign is based on an algorithm from Adobe. It was/is their own attempt to provide a proper kerning … well, sometimes it works, but IMHO most of the time it's producing horrible results. I for myself stick to the metrics option as it refers to the data from the kerning tables within the font-file. Manual kerning is used to make dedicated adjustments e.g. adjusting capitalized text (Versalausgleich) or (unfortunately) numbers. This option should be a standard for every serious typesetting software.
Conclusion for me: manual kerning and metric( font) kerning is a must have, optical kerning is an unnecessary feature. 

Whereas optical alignment (nooo, not the kerning thingies!) is a must have for me as well! It was one of the typographic killer-features that came with InDesign back then (I remember a conversation with an old typesetter (Setzer) showing me young whelp back then that Gutenberg used it already in his bibles but it wasn't available in QuarkXpress or other typesetting software). Unfortunately these days not many people would recognize optical aligned text(columns). Anyway, if there is any chance to get this feature implemented I would be more than happy! 

And for all of you, who only work on a computer: try to do all this things with real hot-metal types (Bleilettern), this is way much more painful but fun as well!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Didot2356 said:

Whereas optical alignment (nooo, not the kerning thingies!) is a must have for me as well! It was one of the typographic killer-features

BTW: This is not only about typography but about everything else. Snapping, tab stops and horizontal/vertical alignment still have no optical option. Serif should begin to implement all graphic rules (which we still follow manually, but without automatic software help). That would be a game changer even without a multi-line-composer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
On 12/17/2018 at 1:53 AM, Oval said:

So true. It’s just as sad as this:

aff.jpg

All letters are optically unbalanced. For exampleI and N should never stick together so tight! 

I've tried with a high quality font like Adobe Myriad Pro. Font optical alignment. It looks very harmonious to me.

image.png.ed0c7e65fec02007e512a425022d1c42.png

By comparison, this is InDesign with Adobe's Optical kerning:

image.png.9f0b085f458c90fd91d4db6ccb97d803.png

 

 

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...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | 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.