Key Fonts Pro CD
J M V Rayner
I've just acquired a copy of the Key Fonts Pro Mac + Windows CD. Very good
value since it includes a wide range of weights for some of the more
important fonts, and good selections of OSF, small caps, ligatures etc.
The quality isn't always perfect, but I'm very impressed.
The problem is that the CD comes (in the bundle I bought) with no
documentation, in particular no lists of fonts or printed samples. Has
anyone produced these? Looking through 1555 fonts by hand will take a long
time!
Help welcome,
Jeremy Rayner
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr Jeremy M. V. Rayner
School of Biological Sciences
University of Bristol
Woodland Road
Bristol BS8 1UG UK
tel. +44 117 928 8111, messages +44 117 928 7476, fax +44 117 925 7374
e-mail J.M.V....@bristol.ac.uk
Mark Overton
> I've just acquired a copy of the Key Fonts Pro Mac + Windows CD. Very good
> value since it includes a wide range of weights for some of the more
> important fonts, and good selections of OSF, small caps, ligatures etc.
> The quality isn't always perfect, but I'm very impressed.
I got the Key fonts Plus CD (1250 fonts), and was less impressed. Many
fonts are incomplete, even missing the double-quotes. The fonts seem to
be of variable quality, with some good ones and some bad ones. The Janson
family is quite good -- it has all the glyphs, and even includes kerning
pairs. Other families, however... :-(. My impression is that the Key Fonts
folks just grabbed fonts and threw them into the CD with little or no
attention to their quality, correctness or completeness.
> The problem is that the CD comes (in the bundle I bought) with no
> documentation, in particular no lists of fonts or printed samples. Has
> anyone produced these? Looking through 1555 fonts by hand will take a long
> time!
Once again, FontMonster to the rescue! FontMonster is shareware, and is
well worth the US$25 registration fee. It cannot handle a group of more
than 500 or so fonts, and gets real slow above around 300 fonts. So print
specimen sheets for each subdirectory on the CD (tt_af, tt_gj, etc)
separately.
BTW, I recommend you buy your workhorse-fonts from reputable companies
such as Monotype or Bitstream.
- Mark
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Overton, Hewlett-Packard (San Diego Division), ma...@sdd.hp.com
cal 9 1752
Robert Schenk
Rayner) wrote:
> I've just acquired a copy of the Key Fonts Pro Mac + Windows CD.
> The problem is that the CD comes (in the bundle I bought) with no
> documentation, in particular no lists of fonts or printed samples. Has
> anyone produced these? Looking through 1555 fonts by hand will take a long
> time!
Looks like a job for *Let's Kill Some Trees* (for printing) or *The Show
Must Go FOND* (for viewing on screen and listing).
Both are available in the info-mac font utilities subdirectory.
(The are also available at ingrimayne.saintjoe.edu when it is up and running.)
R Schenk
bo...@saintjoe.edu
Jon Pastor
|> zoj...@mail.bris.ac.uk (J M V Rayner) writes:
|> > I've just acquired a copy of the Key Fonts Pro Mac + Windows CD. Very good
|> > value since it includes a wide range of weights for some of the more
|> > important fonts, and good selections of OSF, small caps, ligatures etc.
|> > The quality isn't always perfect, but I'm very impressed.
|>
|> I got the Key fonts Plus CD (1250 fonts), and was less impressed. Many
|> fonts are incomplete, even missing the double-quotes. The fonts seem to
|> be of variable quality, with some good ones and some bad ones. The Janson
|> family is quite good -- it has all the glyphs, and even includes kerning
|> pairs. Other families, however... :-(. My impression is that the Key Fonts
|> folks just grabbed fonts and threw them into the CD with little or no
|> attention to their quality, correctness or completeness.
There seems to be some confusion here. Key Fonts seems to have a whole mess
(and that term is not chosen arbitrarily) of CDs available:
1. Key Fonts Pro, 303 fonts, TT and T1 for Mac, TT *ONLY* for PC
2. Key Fonts Pro (no, your eyes are not deceiving you and I did
not mistype that...) 1555 fonts, TT and T1 for Mac and PC
3. Key Fonts Plus, 1250 fonts, ??????????
I own both of the Key Fonts Pro disks. The first is "originals" -- mostly
copies, if memory serves. The second is, according to some very knowledgeable
people, largely a copy of the Adobe CD as of a few years ago, with all the
names changed.
|> > The problem is that the CD comes (in the bundle I bought) with no
|> > documentation, in particular no lists of fonts or printed samples. Has
|> > anyone produced these? Looking through 1555 fonts by hand will take a long
|> > time!
|>
|> Once again, FontMonster to the rescue! FontMonster is shareware, and is
|> well worth the US$25 registration fee. It cannot handle a group of more
|> than 500 or so fonts, and gets real slow above around 300 fonts. So print
|> specimen sheets for each subdirectory on the CD (tt_af, tt_gj, etc)
|> separately.
It's not necessary to print the fonts on the KFP 1555 CD, because if you have
an Adobe or Monotype catalog you already have high-quality samples of better
versions of most of the fonts on the KFP CD. All you need is Bob Long's
immeasurably-useful labor of love, the SSI-FONTS (SSI was the actual source of
the fonts) cross-reference, which maps the fonts on the KFP 1555 CD to their
industry-standard equivalents, more often than not a font on the Adobe CD. So
you find the font you want in the Adobe/Monotype catalog, look it up in Bob's
xref, and voila!
Bob, if you're listening, would you repost this or give Norm Walsh a copy?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon A. Pastor pas...@vfl.paramax.com
Jon Pastor
|> Looking at the fonts, there seem to be some shapes modified from the
|> adobe counterpart, no ?
According to Bob Long, yes.
|> I'm also interested, but one question: how far can one trust the list
|> ? Is it possible for example to take AGaramond.afm for the
|> corresponding font on the CD (BTW, can I fetch somewhere the afm files
|> for the type1 fonts on the CD ?)
No, no, no! The list is just useful for finding the equivalent font *NAME* on
the Key Fonts CD!
|> I think Tiasco, typhoon, the bodoni's and one of the Garamond's are quite
|> valuable, unfortunately, I spent one whole day generating the afm's
|> for use under unix... Seems to me that the families are more complete
|> on this CD than on Bitstream's. Any advice ?
Again, to the extent that it's a clone of the Adobe CD, that's hardly
surprising...
Thierry Bouche
|> In article <3ksh0l...@hpsdlss3.sdd.hp.com>, ma...@sdd.hp.com (Mark Overton) writes:
|> |> zoj...@mail.bris.ac.uk (J M V Rayner) writes:
|> |> > I've just acquired a copy of the Key Fonts Pro Mac + Windows CD. Very good
[...]
|> 1. Key Fonts Pro, 303 fonts, TT and T1 for Mac, TT *ONLY* for PC
|> 2. Key Fonts Pro (no, your eyes are not deceiving you and I did
|> not mistype that...) 1555 fonts, TT and T1 for Mac and PC
|> 3. Key Fonts Plus, 1250 fonts, ??????????
Strange enough ! mine is claimed to provide 1250 and contains 1354
(type1/pc side).
|>
|> I own both of the Key Fonts Pro disks. The first is "originals" -- mostly
|> copies, if memory serves. The second is, according to some very knowledgeable
|> people, largely a copy of the Adobe CD as of a few years ago, with all the
|> names changed.
|>
Looking at the fonts, there seem to be some shapes modified from the
adobe counterpart, no ?
[...]
|> It's not necessary to print the fonts on the KFP 1555 CD, because if you have
|> an Adobe or Monotype catalog you already have high-quality samples of better
|> versions of most of the fonts on the KFP CD. All you need is Bob Long's
|> immeasurably-useful labor of love, the SSI-FONTS (SSI was the actual source of
|> the fonts) cross-reference, which maps the fonts on the KFP 1555 CD to their
|> industry-standard equivalents, more often than not a font on the Adobe CD. So
|> you find the font you want in the Adobe/Monotype catalog, look it up in Bob's
|> xref, and voila!
|>
|> Bob, if you're listening, would you repost this or give Norm Walsh a copy?
I'm also interested, but one question: how far can one trust the list
? Is it possible for example to take AGaramond.afm for the
corresponding font on the CD (BTW, can I fetch somewhere the afm files
for the type1 fonts on the CD ?)
|>
|> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|> Jon A. Pastor pas...@vfl.paramax.com
I think Tiasco, typhoon, the bodoni's and one of the Garamond's are quite
valuable, unfortunately, I spent one whole day generating the afm's
for use under unix... Seems to me that the families are more complete
on this CD than on Bitstream's. Any advice ?
--
Thierry Bouche.
bou...@fourier.grenet.fr
Jim Prall
but I can't recall:
Key Fonts is said to have "cloned" and renamed all the fonts of some of
the big pro houses or at least Adobe's. (I won't be going out and
buying this no matter how low the price.) Now, does anybody know what
they did to the font files while renaming them? Were they batch
converted with a recognizable utility? Has anyone taken a
PostScript file of one or more of their fonts and read the
comments in the PS text file? That often has clues such as
the program used to create the font, or a copyright notice ;-)
or whatever.
Also, was this the company that had to change the name of the
Jan Brady font that was a trademark violation?
--
-- Jim Prall "We'll jump off that bridge
-- Trigraph, Inc., Toronto, CANADA when we come to it."
-- ji...@trigraph.interlog.com WAS: jimp%trigra...@csri.utoronto.ca
Susan Petry
and yeah, key fonts faces are clones which may look fine for low-end
work, but for anyone doing high-res graphics or wanting professional looking
output, there IS a difference.
Susan Petry "god...@artemis.wake.tec.nc.us"
Durham, NC "Equality is NOT a special right."
On 29 Mar 1995, Jim Prall wrote:
> Maybe this was covered way back when the KeyFonts CDs came out,
> but I can't recall:
>
> Key Fonts is said to have "cloned" and renamed all the fonts of some of
> the big pro houses or at least Adobe's. (I won't be going out and
> buying this no matter how low the price.) Now, does anybody know what
> they did to the font files while renaming them?
Jon Pastor
|> BTW, (still waiting for bob's list)
Huh? If you want a copy, send me email... Unless Bob is listening and has an
updated one.
|> 2. I think atlantix is the best font on their CD but I can't relate
|> its design to one I know (kind of a modernized baskerville/garamond).
|> (Especially, this is one family which has a coherent design, not like
|> their baskerville which really look weird).
From Bob Long's invaluable SSIFONTS list:
Atlantix 1 Minion [Adobe]
Atlantix 2 Italic Minion Italic [Adobe]
Atlantix 3 Semibold Minion Semibold [Adobe]
Atlantix 4 Semibold Italic Minion Semibold Italic [Adobe]
Atlantix 5 Bold Minion Bold [Adobe]
Atlantix 6 Bold Italic Minion Bold Italic [Adobe]
Atlantix 7 Black Minion Black [Adobe]
Atlantix 8 Display Minion Display [Adobe]
Atlantix 9 Display Italic Minion Display Italic [Adobe]
Atlantix 10 Ornaments Minion Ornaments [Adobe]
Atlantix 11 Swash Italic Minion Swash Italic [Adobe]
Atl. 12 Swash Semibold Italic Minion Swash Semibold Italic [Adobe]
Atl. 13 Swash Display Italic Minion Swash Display Italic [Adobe]
Atl. 14 Pro Display Minion Expert Display [Adobe]
Atl. 15 Pro Display Italic Minion Expert Display Italic [Adobe]
Atl. 16 Pro Minion Expert [Adobe]
Atl. 17 Pro Italic Minion Expert Italic [Adobe]
Atl. 18 Pro Semibold Minion Expert Semibold [Adobe]
Atl. 19 Pro Semibold Italic Minion Expert Semibold Italic [Adobe]
Atl. 20 Pro Black Bold [sic!] Minion Expert Bold [Adobe]
Atl. 21 Pro Black Bold Italic Minion Expert Bold Italic [Adobe]
Atl. 22 Pro Black Black Minion Expert Black [Adobe]
I haven't compared it with Minion (Adobe, Robert Slimbach) myself.
|> 3. Any info on Insight ? It seems to be conceived for use with TeX,
|> providing the math/symbol fonts and text fonts with the uppercase
|> greek letters. Does it have an adobe counterpart, or is it a clone of
|> b&h's lucida bright ? (or is it original ??)
Again, from the SSI list:
Insight 1 Lucida [Bigelow & Holmes]
Insight 2 Italic Lucida Italic [Bigelow & Holmes]
Insight 3 Bold Lucida Bold [Bigelow & Holmes]
Insight 4 Bold Italic Lucida Bold Italic [Bigelow & Holmes]
Insight Math 1 Extension Lucida Math Extension [B&H]
Insight Math 2 Alternates (no Adobe counterpart??)
Insight Math 3 Symbol Lucida Math Symbol [B&H]
Insight Math 4 Italic Lucida Math Italic [B&H]
Insight Sans 1 Lucida Sans [B&H]
Insight Sans 2 Italic Lucida Sans Italic [B&H]
Insight Sans 3 Bold Lucida Sans Bold [B&H]
Insight Sans 4 Bold Italic Lucida Sans Bold Italic [B&H]
Good guess!
Thierry Bouche
Maybe this was covered way back when the KeyFonts CDs came out,
but I can't recall:
Key Fonts is said to have "cloned" and renamed all the fonts of some of
the big pro houses or at least Adobe's. (I won't be going out and
buying this no matter how low the price.) Now, does anybody know what
they did to the font files while renaming them? Were they batch
converted with a recognizable utility? Has anyone taken a
PostScript file of one or more of their fonts and read the
comments in the PS text file? That often has clues such as
the program used to create the font, or a copyright notice ;-)
or whatever.
For example, from the pfa of one :
%!PS-AdobeFont-1.0: AtlantixProSSi-DisplayRegular
%%CreationDate: Tue Jan 21 02:43:29 1992
%%VMusage: 21376 21376
% Created with FontMonger Copyright (c) 1991-2 Ares Software Corp. All rights reserved.
11 dict begin
/FontInfo 9 dict dup begin
/version (001.000) readonly def
/Notice (Copyright c 1992 Southern Software, Inc. All Rights Reserved) readonly def
/FullName (Atlantix Pro SSi Display Regular) readonly def
/FamilyName (Atlantix Pro Display SSi) readonly def
BTW, (still waiting for bob's list)
Does someone here know
1. Is Key Font's 'pro' encoding the same as Adobe'e 'expert' ?
2. I think atlantix is the best font on their CD but I can't relate
its design to one I know (kind of a modernized baskerville/garamond).
(Especially, this is one family which has a coherent design, not like
their baskerville which really look weird).
3. Any info on Insight ? It seems to be conceived for use with TeX,
providing the math/symbol fonts and text fonts with the uppercase
greek letters. Does it have an adobe counterpart, or is it a clone of
b&h's lucida bright ? (or is it original ??)
--
Thierry Bouche.
bou...@fourier.grenet.fr
Mark Overton
> > 2. I think atlantix is the best font on their CD but I can't relate
> > its design to one I know (kind of a modernized baskerville/garamond).
>
>
> Atlantix 1 Minion [Adobe]
Yep, their Minion, er, Atlantix looks pretty good.
OTOH, that CD is riddled with serious errors, including a few fonts
that'll crash Windows.
With Bob's list, you can use the Keyfonts CD to preview the Adobe and
Monotype fonts, select the ones you like, and then pay for unlocks on the
real things.
Jon mailed me Bob's list, and I too will email it to anyone who wants it.
Practically all of the 1555 fonts are identified, and a cross-reference
is included, so you can find fonts both ways:
Keyfont's name ==> Standard name
Standard name ==> Keyfont's name
Typonaut/Clive Bruton
(Jon Pastor) wrote:
...
> From Bob Long's invaluable SSIFONTS list:
>
> Atlantix 1 Minion [Adobe]
> Atlantix 2 Italic Minion Italic [Adobe]
...
> Insight 1 Lucida [Bigelow & Holmes]
> Insight 2 Italic Lucida Italic [Bigelow & Holmes]...
For once I'm stunned into silence :-(
Is it very useful or helpful, to list copyrighted fonts and their cheap
clones, surely this undermines the former.
Jon, our differences aside, you do seem to take a certain amount of joy in
doing this, I can't think why.
Perhaps Dr Bigelow, Robert Slimbach or anyone from Adobe (David/Terry?)
would care to comment.
Clive Bruton (AKA a *very, very sad* Typonaut :-(((((((((((()
Murray McMahon
Jeremy
Yes, it takes a long time to print out all the fonts. I bought the same
package and it took me about a week of constant loading and printing. The
result was an entire three inch binder (full) with both sides of the page
used. However, I printed the fonts out in various sizes (9, 10, 12, 14,
18, 20, 24). It really wasn't worth it! There is an easier way. I don't
know what kind of computer you have. I have a Mac and later downloaded
"Font Clerk" from InfoMac. This handy shareware lets you print out font
samples, though at one size only. There is a catch. It can only handle
about 20 fonts at a time, so it'll take some time to re-load fonts and
print out reports. Also, it isn't too kind to some fonts (it cuts them
off). However, if you want a print out, this would definitely be the
easiest method. I'd like to hear back from you to see how it's going.
Murray McMahon
mmcm...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
Elias Kougianos
Typonaut/Clive Bruton <typo...@d-supp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
[Stuff about font name equivalencies deleted]
>
>Is it very useful or helpful, to list copyrighted fonts and their cheap
>clones, surely this undermines the former.
>
second. Some background: I am looking for a nice font to type my dissertation
in. I want something a little bit more uncommon than Times which is all
that is available to me. Our department is too low on funds and they don't
give a shit about their graduate students either. Note that I am not about
to typeset Stephen King's latest book which would make me a gazzabillion $'s.
No, I only want my dissertation to look nice. I have no idea how much the
real Adobe fonts would cost, but something tells me it's gonna be more than
the $29.95 I paid for the Key Fonts Pro CD. I regret the fact I don't have
about $10,000 to experiment with various real Adobe typefaces, but that's
life. I found a very cheap and very satisfactory solution and I am very
happy. Bob's list is gonna save me the trouble of trying out many printing
iterations (for which I pay out of my pocket, btw). I don't see how that
bothers you but get over it.
Is all this legal? You bet your life again, otherwise I can't see how you
can buy this and similar CD's practically everywhere.
Is it moral? Don't care. As I explained previously I am not trying to make
any money out of this. Let all the big houses get together, hire the best
lawyers they can get (the DO make money, right?) and see how they can
change things. As for me, I don't give a damn either way.
>
>Perhaps Dr Bigelow, Robert Slimbach or anyone from Adobe (David/Terry?)
>would care to comment.
>
With all due respect to these people (whose names are only marginally
familiar since I am not an expert in typography) why don't you ask for
the comments of all the regular folks who actually have to go out and
buy the fonts they use?
>
>Clive Bruton (AKA a *very, very sad* Typonaut :-(((((((((((()
>
I hope you cheer up.
Elias Kougianos
Quixote Digital Typography
Elias Kougianos <eek...@unix1.sncc.lsu.edu> wrote:
>In article <typonaut-310...@158.152.67.91>,
>Typonaut/Clive Bruton <typo...@d-supp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>[Stuff about font name equivalencies deleted]
>>Is it very useful or helpful, to list copyrighted fonts and their cheap
>>clones, surely this undermines the former.
>You bet your life it's helpful! I don't see how the first undermines the
>second. Some background: I am looking for a nice font to type my dissertation
>in. I want something a little bit more uncommon than Times which is all
>that is available to me. Our department is too low on funds and they don't
>give a shit about their graduate students either. Note that I am not about
>to typeset Stephen King's latest book which would make me a gazzabillion $'s.
>No, I only want my dissertation to look nice. I have no idea how much the
>real Adobe fonts would cost, but something tells me it's gonna be more than
>the $29.95 I paid for the Key Fonts Pro CD. I regret the fact I don't have
>about $10,000 to experiment with various real Adobe typefaces, but that's
>life. I found a very cheap and very satisfactory solution and I am very
>happy. Bob's list is gonna save me the trouble of trying out many printing
>iterations (for which I pay out of my pocket, btw). I don't see how that
>bothers you but get over it.
But of course, because you don't bother to investigate the cost of
purchasing legitimate fonts you don't know how much it'll cost you.
Hmm I can for around $90 buy the Berthold Diamond Fonts CD. This
includes low-res outlines for all the fonts, unlocked, in Type 1
format. I think this is some 250 *families* of type plus a collection
of some 100 pi fonts. Since you're only going to laser print, this is
will meet your needs. Should you feel compelled to go to real print,
you can unlock the fonts in high-res versions at $25 per and use that
for imagesetting (this will be an insignificant part of the total bill
in any event). It will cost more, but I doubt that you'll be finding
much math pi on your keyfonts CD.
Monotype FoneFonts CD can be had for around $29 which includes 8 free
monotype classic fonts. Additional unlocks, figure around $20 per
font, less in families through FontHaus or Publisher's Toolbox.
Adobe Type on Call is around $50, includes a whole pile of fonts plus
more free unlocks. I think unlocking runs around $24 per font, less in
packages. I don't have a copy since I'm waiting for a free copy to
arrive miraculously on my doorstep (or via any of the various
mail or parcel services).
>Is all this legal? You bet your life again, otherwise I can't see how you
>can buy this and similar CD's practically everywhere.
Sure it's legal. But then 150 years ago, slavery was legal too.
>Is it moral? Don't care. As I explained previously I am not trying to make
>any money out of this. Let all the big houses get together, hire the best
>lawyers they can get (the DO make money, right?) and see how they can
>change things. As for me, I don't give a damn either way.
So if I go into my neighbor's yard and take some of his oranges, it's
OK because I'm not planning on selling them or using them to make
money?
>>Perhaps Dr Bigelow, Robert Slimbach or anyone from Adobe (David/Terry?)
>>would care to comment.
>With all due respect to these people (whose names are only marginally
>familiar since I am not an expert in typography) why don't you ask for
>the comments of all the regular folks who actually have to go out and
>buy the fonts they use?
Well the comments above are from someone who does go out to buy the
fonts he uses.
As to the names above, understand that typedesigns do not appear
autochthonically. Real, living, breathing, bill-paying people create
them. Chuck Bigelow (whose name you may see attached to the occasional
article in this newsgroup) is the co-designer with Kris Holmes of the
Lucida type family. I can't help but wonder whether some of the
typefaces on the CDs in question might include copies of Lucida faces
for which there are still Design Patents in effect (the only
protection for type design available in this country at the present).
Robert Slimbach is the designer of a number of typefaces including
Minion, Adobe Garamond et alia.
As for these monolithic type companies, if they're rolling in so much
dough, then go to the local bookstore or library and look through
copies of Publish, Print, Step by Step, etc. and see how many ads
there are from Linotype, Monotype, Adobe (the type division: ads for
Photoshop, ILlustrator, Pagemaker, etc. don't count). Frequency and
size of ads tends to be directly proportional to their profitability.
You probably will find ads for some of the rip-off font companies.
After all, it's much cheaper to produce typefaces if you don't have to
pay the people who make them.
-dh
--
Don Hosek "I'm thinking this somehow elevates my rank in the herd and
Quixote Digital Typography improves my mating possibilities." -Dilbert
Publishers of _Serif: The Magazine of Type and Typography_
909-621-1291 Current reading: _Hosea_ (Andersen,
FAX: 909-625-1342 Freedman), _Antologia de
dho...@quixote.com Cuentos Mexicanos II_ (Millau, ed.)
Elias Kougianos
Quixote Digital Typography <qui...@netcom.com> wrote:
[My original post deleted to save bandwith]
>
>But of course, because you don't bother to investigate the cost of
>purchasing legitimate fonts you don't know how much it'll cost you.
So the fonts in the Key Pro CD are not legitimate? You sure about that?
Would you like to check on that? Maybe you should.
>Hmm I can for around $90 buy the Berthold Diamond Fonts CD. This
>includes low-res outlines for all the fonts, unlocked, in Type 1
>format. I think this is some 250 *families* of type plus a collection
>
>Monotype FoneFonts CD can be had for around $29 which includes 8 free
>monotype classic fonts. Additional unlocks, figure around $20 per
>font, less in families through FontHaus or Publisher's Toolbox.
>
>Adobe Type on Call is around $50, includes a whole pile of fonts plus
>more free unlocks. I think unlocking runs around $24 per font, less in
>packages. I don't have a copy since I'm waiting for a free copy to
>arrive miraculously on my doorstep (or via any of the various
>mail or parcel services).
>
None of the above costs less than the $29 I paid for the Key Pro CD. Now,
unless my math is failing me, $24 x 1555 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> $29.95. Sorry,
as I said before I am not drowning in money right this moment.
>
>Sure it's legal. But then 150 years ago, slavery was legal too.
>
I suggest you take a look at your calendar. This IS 1995. What's gonna
happen in 150 years leaves me totally indifferent.
>
>So if I go into my neighbor's yard and take some of his oranges, it's
>OK because I'm not planning on selling them or using them to make
>money?
>
I believe you have a problem distinguishing between morality and legality.
An introductory course in philoshophy would help clearing out some
fundamental concepts and maybe would assist in understanding the world
around you. Stealing oranges violates the law therefore you will be
punished. Buying a perfectly legal CD doen't violate any laws, unless
you operate in an alternate reality. No?
>
>Well the comments above are from someone who does go out to buy the
>fonts he uses.
>
Good for you. So do I.
>As to the names above, understand that typedesigns do not appear
>autochthonically. Real, living, breathing, bill-paying people create
>them. Chuck Bigelow (whose name you may see attached to the occasional
>article in this newsgroup) is the co-designer with Kris Holmes of the
>Lucida type family. I can't help but wonder whether some of the
>typefaces on the CDs in question might include copies of Lucida faces
>for which there are still Design Patents in effect (the only
>protection for type design available in this country at the present).
>
>Robert Slimbach is the designer of a number of typefaces including
>Minion, Adobe Garamond et alia.
>
I never nurished the illusion that fonts are created effortessly and at
no expense. However, as an end user, I have the option to pay $29.95
or $24 x 1115 for comparable laser results I will go for the cheap and legal
solution. Sorry, life is tough for me too, you know.
>As for these monolithic type companies, if they're rolling in so much
>dough, then go to the local bookstore or library and look through
>copies of Publish, Print, Step by Step, etc. and see how many ads
>there are from Linotype, Monotype, Adobe (the type division: ads for
>Photoshop, ILlustrator, Pagemaker, etc. don't count). Frequency and
>size of ads tends to be directly proportional to their profitability.
>
I suggest you go back and read the original post. I didn't question their
right to make money. Quite the contrary. What I suggested was to go and
get good lawyers (something tells me they've done it already).
>Don Hosek "I'm thinking this somehow elevates my rank in the herd
>Quixote Digital Typography improves my mating possibilities." -Dilb
Elias Kougianos
Mark Overton
> I have no idea how much the
>real Adobe fonts would cost, but something tells me it's gonna be more than
How about $24.99? That's what Monotype currently wants for its CD, which
includes eight unlocks (ie, you can choose any 8 MT fonts). You also get
a previewer to let you view and print samples of everything on the CD, a
time-saving nicety which the clone CD's *don't* give you.
- Mark
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Overton, Hewlett-Packard (San Diego Division), ma...@sdd.hp.com
The word `very' is very overused. Avoid it. -- My High School English teacher
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
Digital Typography) wrote:
> >>Perhaps Dr Bigelow, Robert Slimbach or anyone from Adobe (David/Terry?)
> >>would care to comment.
>
> >With all due respect to these people (whose names are only marginally
> >familiar since I am not an expert in typography) why don't you ask for
> >the comments of all the regular folks who actually have to go out and
> >buy the fonts they use?
>
> Well the comments above are from someone who does go out to buy the
> fonts he uses.
Thank you Don, Elias of course I by fonts too, where else would I get
them, maybe posted here as binaries, please no!
>
> As to the names above, understand that typedesigns do not appear
> autochthonically. Real, living, breathing, bill-paying people create
> them. Chuck Bigelow (whose name you may see attached to the occasional
> article in this newsgroup) is the co-designer with Kris Holmes of the
> Lucida type family. I can't help but wonder whether some of the
> typefaces on the CDs in question might include copies of Lucida faces
> for which there are still Design Patents in effect (the only
> protection for type design available in this country at the present).
>
> Robert Slimbach is the designer of a number of typefaces including
> Minion, Adobe Garamond et alia.
That was my point really, the original posting took the form of a list of
Lucida and Minion fonts, and their clones
>
> As for these monolithic type companies, if they're rolling in so much
> dough, then go to the local bookstore or library and look through
> copies of Publish, Print, Step by Step, etc. and see how many ads
> there are from Linotype, Monotype, Adobe (the type division: ads for
> Photoshop, ILlustrator, Pagemaker, etc. don't count). Frequency and
> size of ads tends to be directly proportional to their profitability.
Don't just look at the ads, look at how many people they are laying off, I
think it was David Lemon (Adobe Systems) who said recently something like
"people think it's okay to rip off the big guy, remember that lots of
little guys work for big guys". Sorry if I attribute this wrongly, but I
feel pretty certain that David would agree.
>
> You probably will find ads for some of the rip-off font companies.
> After all, it's much cheaper to produce typefaces if you don't have to
> pay the people who make them.
Here's my analysis of that:
Cost to design, digitise and market an original commercial grade font
<$10,000 per font.
Cost to digitise and license an existing font <$2,000
Cost to poorly digitise and rip-off someone else's work >$50
Cost to "wobble" someone else's data >10 cents
Or put another way, I was at a MacUser show a couple of years ago, and
chanced across a cloners stand (I didn't know it at the time though,
luckily for them!), we were talking about digitising and they were telling
me about their wonderful system, "How long would it take you to digitise a
font" I was asked, "about 10 days" (working from excellent artwork
obviously), "10 days, we do ours in 3 hours", and they were proud of it!
Does that make sense to you?
Clive Bruton (AKA the Typonaut :-)))))))))))))
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
(Elias Kougianos) wrote:
>[lots of snip]
The problem is Elias, you don't know what you're talking about, not a big
sin in this area, but Don does.
Ray Stricklin
EK>no expense. However, as an end user, I have the option to pay $29.95
EK>or $24 x 1115 for comparable laser results I will go for the cheap and
EK>legal solution. Sorry, life is tough for me too, you know.
>As for these monolithic type companies, if they're rolling in so much
>dough, then go to the local bookstore or library and look through
>copies of Publish, Print, Step by Step, etc. and see how many ads
>there are from Linotype, Monotype, Adobe (the type division: ads for
>Photoshop, ILlustrator, Pagemaker, etc. don't count). Frequency and
>size of ads tends to be directly proportional to their profitability.
I thought the courts had settled this a _very_ long time ago..
copyrighting a typeface is not legal. Copyrigting the name of that
typeface, however, is perfectly fine. I don't see the problem we're
having..
-rS
---
ş MR/2 2.2 NR ş If this were an actual tagline, it would be funny.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet: ray_st...@tscnet.eskimo.com (Ray Stricklin)
This message was processed by NetXpress from Merlin Systems Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerry Cullingford
>Is it very useful or helpful, to list copyrighted fonts and their cheap
>clones, surely this undermines the former.
Hmm. I suspect that it probably works both ways - you can also find better
versions if you see the cheap clone first :-)
Are there any figures available on the percentages of users who use full
price fonts, cheapies, and a mixture of the two? I'd suspect that printers
would usually use the full price versions, a lot of desktop users wouldn't
dream of spending noticeable quantities of money on fonts and so would
only use the cheap versions, and that the percentage who'd pay if they
couldn't find a cheap version is likely to be fairly small - but I'd
be interested to know what the actual situation is.
--
_|_
/ | Jerry Cullingford j...@crosfield.co.uk (Work)
\_|_ j...@selune.demon.co.uk (Home)
\__/ Hemel Hempstead, UK je...@shell.portal.com (alternate)
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
(Jerry Cullingford) wrote:
> In article <typonaut-310...@158.152.67.91>
typo...@d-supp.demon.co.uk (Typonaut/Clive Bruton) writes:
> >Is it very useful or helpful, to list copyrighted fonts and their cheap
> >clones, surely this undermines the former.
>
> Hmm. I suspect that it probably works both ways - you can also find better
> versions if you see the cheap clone first :-)
>
> Are there any figures available on the percentages of users who use full
> price fonts, cheapies, and a mixture of the two? I'd suspect that printers
> would usually use the full price versions, a lot of desktop users wouldn't
> dream of spending noticeable quantities of money on fonts and so would
> only use the cheap versions, and that the percentage who'd pay if they
> couldn't find a cheap version is likely to be fairly small - but I'd
> be interested to know what the actual situation is.
>
I suppose that the real problem is (from my point of view) that
"squillions of fonts for $30" are of essentially the same quality as
Adobe/Monotype et al, at least if we are talking about Bitstream, my rants
are aimed at those who IMO cheat their way around the law and make little
or no investment in the overall business, and yes I include BT in that
bunch.
They did have a solution a few years ago of selling cheaper fonts, a
special low res set that would only print up to 400dpi.
I also note that Berthold have taken a similar route 1400 fonts for GBP50,
this CD apparently includes low res fonts (the 1400), which are suitable
for lasers, and high res which can be paid extra for and unlocked when
required, which seems to me to be the ideal match for lots of cheap fonts
and, quality and integrity.
Does anyone know how the Berthold fonts are "restricted", is it in the PS
code, are they bitmaps, or have the outlines been "roughened" using some
algorithm?
Robert Schenk
mmcm...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (Murray McMahon) wrote:
> I have a Mac and later downloaded
> "Font Clerk" from InfoMac. This handy shareware lets you print out font
> samples, though at one size only. There is a catch. It can only handle
> about 20 fonts at a time, so it'll take some time to re-load fonts and
> print out reports. Also, it isn't too kind to some fonts (it cuts them
> off). However, if you want a print out, this would definitely be the
> easiest method. I'd like to hear back from you to see how it's going.
>
> Murray McMahon
> mmcm...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
This is no solution. It is a problem.
What you need is a program which you can point to a file, folder or
drive, and it will automatically print out all the fonts on it while you
go to lunch. If you get a paper jam while you are away, you want to
be able to reset it so it starts up where it left off. You want
the program to be able to handle any number of fonts--10, 1000, or
a million--automatically. This is definitely the easiest way--no bothering with
installing or even knowing what is there. And it is not a dream--it
exists. You just found the wrong program.
R Schenk
Jon Pastor
|> What you need is a program which you can point to a file, folder or
|> drive, and it will automatically print out all the fonts on it while you
|> go to lunch. If you get a paper jam while you are away, you want to
|> be able to reset it so it starts up where it left off. You want
|> the program to be able to handle any number of fonts--10, 1000, or
|> a million--automatically. This is definitely the easiest way--no bothering with
|> installing or even knowing what is there. And it is not a dream--it
|> exists. You just found the wrong program.
Ekkehard Rohwedder
1 - use Linux with GhostScript
2 - write some PostScript code to display font samples
(for printing out a gazillion fonts I used 1 line/font, 2 columns/page)
which means that for each font you want to display you have to add some
line of the form:
/Fontname showfont
(where showfont is the new font display function you just defined).
3 - add appropriate definitions for fonts/fontfiles in GhostScript's
fontmap file
4 - preview / print the file from 2.
Given .afm files and the power of Unix, steps 2 and 3 can be automated.
Of course there is some `startup' overhead involved. Also, depending on
available core memory, you may only be able to print out a couple hundred
fonts at a time (you can comment out sections in the PostScript and fontmap
file, however).
-- Ekkehard (who'd rather write a sh script that compile 1000 WYSIWYG font
samples by hand)
David Lemon
>Does anyone know how the Berthold fonts are "restricted", is it in the PS
>code, are they bitmaps, or have the outlines been "roughened" using some
>algorithm?
I haven't taken apart fonts on the Berthold CD, but I suspect the
resolution limitation is just a carry-over of Berthold's earlier
"Design Fonts" arrangement - their initial approach to DTP. In this
scheme, they supplied Type 1 fonts in which the outlines were built
without curves; what looked like curves was really a number of short
lines. This sort of outline would look reasonable on-screen at at
(most) laser-printer resolutions (at least in smaller sizes) but would
look obviously crude at a sufficiently high resolution or large size.
In the original arrangement, only Berthold-supplied shops would have
the "real" fonts; now, on the CD, one can buy unlocks.
One does run the risk of some users not caring about the quality, and
others thinking that's as good as the fonts get. We heard a number of
professionals who thought the "problem" lay in the Type 1 technology. :(
- David Lemon
type nerd
Hilmar Schlegel
qui...@netcom.com (Quixote Digital Typography) writes:
> In article <3ln35o$4...@unix1.sncc.lsu.edu>,
> Elias Kougianos <eek...@unix1.sncc.lsu.edu> wrote:
>
>>In article <typonaut-310...@158.152.67.91>,
>> Typonaut/Clive Bruton <typo...@d-supp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>
>
>>[Stuff about font name equivalencies deleted]
>
> But of course, because you don't bother to investigate the cost of
> purchasing legitimate fonts you don't know how much it'll cost you.
> Hmm I can for around $90 buy the Berthold Diamond Fonts CD. This
> includes low-res outlines for all the fonts, unlocked, in Type 1
> format. I think this is some 250 *families* of type plus a collection
> of some 100 pi fonts. Since you're only going to laser print, this is
> will meet your needs. Should you feel compelled to go to real print,
> you can unlock the fonts in high-res versions at $25 per and use that
> for imagesetting (this will be an insignificant part of the total bill
> in any event). It will cost more, but I doubt that you'll be finding
> much math pi on your keyfonts CD.
>
> Monotype FoneFonts CD can be had for around $29 which includes 8 free
> monotype classic fonts. Additional unlocks, figure around $20 per
> font, less in families through FontHaus or Publisher's Toolbox.
>
> Adobe Type on Call is around $50, includes a whole pile of fonts plus
> more free unlocks. I think unlocking runs around $24 per font, less in
> packages. I don't have a copy since I'm waiting for a free copy to
> arrive miraculously on my doorstep (or via any of the various
> mail or parcel services).
Yes, from the point of view of a font-collector you are right: all fonts can
be licenced with rather efficient prices per font if you get the entire
library on all the CDs avail....
But in case you hunt for one nice font (not only a single font file) you
have to invest usually much more than $25 or $50 or $100 which then becomes
to be in the same order as the whole project.
Finally is to mention, that for example the 35 basics at $24 each isn't
cheap either....
Usually some fonts are offered in bundles which are completely useless in
case one needs something specific. Furthermore experience shows that many
fonts are purchased many times together with other software and the
"collection" doesn't increase nor improves.
Given this odd situation one should not wonder when companies find "cheaper"
ways to sell fonts....
Last but not least I would wonder when the designer would really
get a substancial share from the sales success of his fonts.
So I would aggree with your arguments in case I would have to send the
cheques directly to the designers ;-)
Hilmar Schlegel
###
#########################################################################
Hilmar Schlegel
(schl...@x-ray0.roen.ipp-garching.mpg.de) (52.31/13.32)
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
Lemon) wrote:
> In article <clive-04049...@158.152.67.91>
cl...@d-supp.demon.co.uk (Clive Bruton/Typonaut) writes:
> >Does anyone know how the Berthold fonts are "restricted", is it in the PS
> >code, are they bitmaps, or have the outlines been "roughened" using some
> >algorithm?
>
> I haven't taken apart fonts on the Berthold CD, but I suspect the
> resolution limitation is just a carry-over of Berthold's earlier
> "Design Fonts" arrangement - their initial approach to DTP. In this
> scheme, they supplied Type 1 fonts in which the outlines were built
> without curves; what looked like curves was really a number of short
> lines.
Right, like the old Linotron 202 digital setters(?) a series of chords, if
I remember right, this type of setting looked okay up to about 48pt at
high res, but as Don comments it's hard to tell from the ad in U&lc.
> ...In the original arrangement, only Berthold-supplied shops would have
> the "real" fonts; now, on the CD, one can buy unlocks.
Which is a problem for the professional user, hoping that your Bureau also
has the fonts, have to check this one out, but obviously not a problem for
those mainly using lasers.
Have Adobe ever thought about moving into the area of low res fonts, isn't
it possible to restrict the output resolution in the PS coding of the
font?
>
> One does run the risk of some users not caring about the quality, and
> others thinking that's as good as the fonts get. We heard a number of
> professionals who thought the "problem" lay in the Type 1 technology. :(
Yes, heard that lots of times, "the fonts are badly cut", "there are no
kerning pairs", what these people seem to conveniently forget is that
there is some guy sitting in the back room of their typesetters defining
the "house style", likewise they must do the same on their own systems.
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
bo...@saintjoe.edu (Robert Schenk) wrote:
> ...This is definitely the easiest way--no bothering with
> installing or even knowing what is there. And it is not a dream--it
> exists. You just found the wrong program.
Robert, don't be so modest as to leave out the name of the program and
it's creator, and don't be teased by anyone else on the subject, there's
no reason why you shouldn't give out the details.
Nick Ralph
code, are they bitmaps, or have the outlines been "roughened" using some
algorithm?
I don't know about the present ones, but the Berthold low-res fonts for their
proprietary system as was in use about 3 years ago, were what were known as
'straights'. There were no bezier curves in the designs, just a smallish
number of points joined by straight lines. These were just about OK for
low-res try-outs at smallish sizes, but completely useless for anything else,
even normal 300dpi laser output. Obviously, this affected the usefulness of
some fonts a great deal more than others*
BCingU
Nick
Quixote Digital Typography
Hilmar Schlegel <schl...@x-ray0.roen.ipp-garching.mpg.de> wrote:
>Yes, from the point of view of a font-collector you are right: all fonts can
>be licenced with rather efficient prices per font if you get the entire
>library on all the CDs avail....
I'm having some difficulty following your arguments. The prices I quoted
in the now-deleted section were for purchasing individual fonts. I
have no interest in purchasing complete libraries of type. If I were a
service bureau perhaps, but as a working typographic designer, it
doesn't make a whole lot of sense economically or practically to bulk
up on huge numbers of typefaces.
>But in case you hunt for one nice font (not only a single font file) you
>have to invest usually much more than $25 or $50 or $100 which then becomes
>to be in the same order as the whole project.
Well let's see. I can order a 4-font family from the Monotype CD for
$75 (or less). The cost of acquiring locked CDs is not of concern to
me. Effectively it's 0 courtesy of the various freebies. In practice I
usually spend around $100/family since I insist on typefaces with full
expert sets (in some cases, it actually ends up being much less--I
rarely use boldface in my designs and almost always use text figures:
the expert set plus the roman face gives me everything I need for many
of the Adobe families.
The cost of typesetting, even at these prices and ignoring inflation
is probably cheaper than it has ever been. With locked CDs and on-line
delivery mechanisms (CompuServe's DTPOnline, A*I's DesignOnline,
Emigre's new BBS whose name escapes me, etc. etc.) fonts can be had
instantaneously (incidentally, if you care to see a case of the
ignorant arguing with the dumb, check out the font piracy debate that
appeared in Print, I think it was November 93... neither side seemed
to be even vaguely aware of what was available in the marketplace--and
had been for years--and so were arguing over a non-existent situation).
>Finally is to mention, that for example the 35 basics at $24 each isn't
>cheap either....
Well ignoring the issue of whether the 35 "basics" are a desirable
addition to the type library, 13 of these are bundled with every copy
of ATM I've ever seen, the other 22 are available along with the
"Illustrator" font set at a total cost of around $100-150.
>Usually some fonts are offered in bundles which are completely useless in
>case one needs something specific. Furthermore experience shows that many
>fonts are purchased many times together with other software and the
>"collection" doesn't increase nor improves.
Funny, I've not had that experience. Except for all those copies of
Tekton which seem to be out to get me.
>Given this odd situation one should not wonder when companies find "cheaper"
>ways to sell fonts....
I have no idea what you're getting at here.
>Last but not least I would wonder when the designer would really
>get a substancial share from the sales success of his fonts.
Yes the designer does. Freelancers get paid a per-copy royalty. Staff
designers get to keep their jobs.
>So I would aggree with your arguments in case I would have to send the
>cheques directly to the designers ;-)
Again, I'm not sure that I'm understanding you, but certainly, if you
will rise to the challenge, I'll be glad to forward on cheques to any
type designers who were behind the designs any readers of this message
might care to send. I have the postal addresses of nearly any type
designer likely to be ripped off (but I don't feel that I should
publish any of these addresses without their permission, thus the
forwarding offer).
Cheques should be sent to me at
Quixote Digital Typography, Inc.
555 Guilford Avenue
Claremont, CA 91711
and be made payable to the individual designer. I'm sure the
comp.fonts readership would be more than helpful in identifying the
responsible individual in each case.
Hilmar Schlegel
cl...@d-supp.demon.co.uk (Clive Bruton/Typonaut) writes:
> In article <1995Apr4.2...@adobe.com>, le...@adobe.com (David
> Lemon) wrote:
>
>> I haven't taken apart fonts on the Berthold CD, but I suspect the
>> resolution limitation is just a carry-over of Berthold's earlier
>> "Design Fonts" arrangement - their initial approach to DTP. In this
>> scheme, they supplied Type 1 fonts in which the outlines were built
>> without curves; what looked like curves was really a number of short
>> lines.
>>
>
> Have Adobe ever thought about moving into the area of low res fonts, isn't
> it possible to restrict the output resolution in the PS coding of the
> font?
For which purpose? To produce jam fonts to fill $10 font CD's ???
Hilmar Schlegel
###
#########################################################################
Hilmar Schlegel
(h...@semic.ipp-garching.mpg.de) (52.31/13.32)
Charles A. Bigelow
>I'll be glad to forward on cheques to any
>type designers who were behind the designs any readers of this message
>might care to send. I have the postal addresses of nearly any type
>designer likely to be ripped off (but I don't feel that I should
>publish any of these addresses without their permission, thus the
>forwarding offer).
Heck, Don, if any net fontster sends you a royalty check for me (say, someone
who has greatly enjoyed the Key Font rip-offs of Lucida, but just sorta didn't
know where to send their monetary appreciation to the designer), I'd be
delighted to contribute 10% of the amount to the care and feeding of "Serif:
the magazine of type and typography".
Somehow, I don't guess that this will be a major revenue stream for you, but
hey, every little bit helps, eh?!
-- Chuck
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
h...@semic.ipp-garching.mpg.de wrote:
> > (me)
> > Have Adobe ever thought about moving into the area of low res fonts, isn't
> > it possible to restrict the output resolution in the PS coding of the
> > font?
>
> For which purpose? To produce jam fonts to fill $10 font CD's ???
>
No, to produce fonts for the mass market who do not require high
resolution, thus giving access, integrity and quality without pawning the
family silver.
Clive Bruton (AKA the Typonaut)
Hilmar Schlegel
qui...@netcom.com (Quixote Digital Typography) writes:
> In article <1995040422363...@x-ray0.roen.ipp-garching.mpg.de>,
> Hilmar Schlegel <schl...@x-ray0.roen.ipp-garching.mpg.de> wrote:
>
>
>> Yes, from the point of view of a font-collector you are right: all fonts
>> can be licenced with rather efficient prices per font if you get the
>> entire library on all the CDs avail....
>>
>
> I'm having some difficulty following your arguments. The prices I quoted
> in the now-deleted section were for purchasing individual fonts. I
> have no interest in purchasing complete libraries of type. If I were a
> service bureau perhaps, but as a working typographic designer, it
> doesn't make a whole lot of sense economically or practically to bulk
> up on huge numbers of typefaces.
Exactly this argument was my intention. You could have stressed the argument
how cheap bunches of entire CD's are - but you didn't.
A similar problem occurs in case you want to have a nice set of fonts for a
non-commercial project like a thesis. Of course font foundries are not
intended to serve poor students...
>
>
>>But in case you hunt for one nice font (not only a single font file) you
>> have to invest usually much more than $25 or $50 or $100 which then
>> becomes to be in the same order as the whole project.
>>
>
> Well let's see. I can order a 4-font family from the Monotype CD for
> $75 (or less). The cost of acquiring locked CDs is not of concern to
> me. Effectively it's 0 courtesy of the various freebies. In practice I
> usually spend around $100/family since I insist on typefaces with full
That is a resonable approximation. (At least in the US - here I have to pay
for an unlock 80DM each cut)
>
> The cost of typesetting, even at these prices and ignoring inflation
> is probably cheaper than it has ever been. With locked CDs and on-line
In case of a small-scale project the font price is no longer negligible.
You are correct with the question if that should be the case or if the font
supplier must force the user to make money with the fonts.
> had been for years--and so were arguing over a non-existent situation).
The current practice produces a "de facto" situation. And what is to observe
that font prices are lowered. There are definitively offers which are really
a steel - and these offers are from the major suppliers.
Please do not misunderstand, my point is not to favor rip-offs of minor
quality or 3-hour designs.
My point is the question how to get a single (say 4-font) family at
reasonable prices.
Practice shows that it is easier to get "some fonts" (bonafide, but
nevertheless useless, e.g. in a package) than something specific.
>> many fonts are purchased many times together with other software and the
>> "collection" doesn't increase nor improves.
>>
>
> Funny, I've not had that experience. Except for all those copies of
> Tekton which seem to be out to get me.
Seems to be due to the fact that you can ignore the "startup-costs" because
they are within the roundoff error compared to Illustrator, CD base prices,
low res font prices &c.
I only want to mention that this is possibly *not* the general situation of
the "average" potential font user - but instead tends more to the approach
of a service bureau. It starts to move in the "right"? direction now: the
Linotype CD can be haven for free and then only unlocks count.
At the end I believe a similar approach like that which applies for
high-performance
computing has to be introduced. For more performance one has to pay more.
Who can drive an entire service bureau with a single "printer" will have to
pay more than an occasional user who writes marriage-invitations.
>
>
>> Given this odd situation one should not wonder when companies find
>> "cheaper" ways to sell fonts....
>>
>
> I have no idea what you're getting at here.
People like rip-off's with awful quality more since they can be purchased on
the steet, in every CD MAcDonalds...
It is common practice that Linux is sold on CD, that a FTP archive is
reproduced on CD &c. People pay for this! Therefore I believe it is a
question of marketing and hope for the best: high quality fonts at
reasonable prices....
>
>
>>Last but not least I would wonder when the designer would really
>> get a substancial share from the sales success of his fonts.
>>
>
> Yes the designer does. Freelancers get paid a per-copy royalty.
> Staff
> designers get to keep their jobs.
And keep how many jobs of other "staff"? Adobe's products have a price of at
least twice here in Europe compared to the States and support comes
basically from overseas, developement too, I assume.
>
>
>>So I would aggree with your arguments in case I would have to send the
>> cheques directly to the designers ;-)
>>
>
> Again, I'm not sure that I'm understanding you, but certainly, if you
> will rise to the challenge, I'll be glad to forward on cheques to any
> type designers who were behind the designs any readers of this message
> might care to send.
I mean the difference between the rip-off price and the list-price of the
original.
> I have the postal addresses of nearly any type
> designer
Which constitute the "International Designer Archive".... ;-)
>
> Cheques should be sent to me at
> Quixote Digital Typography, Inc.
> 555 Guilford Avenue
> Claremont, CA 91711
Maybe some day for the Serif....
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
h...@semic.ipp-garching.mpg.de wrote:
> In message Wed, 5 Apr 1995 17:24:06 GMT,
> qui...@netcom.com (Quixote Digital Typography) writes:
>
> > In article <1995040422363...@x-ray0.roen.ipp-garching.mpg.de>,
> > Hilmar Schlegel <schl...@x-ray0.roen.ipp-garching.mpg.de> wrote:
> >
> Exactly this argument was my intention. You could have stressed the argument
> how cheap bunches of entire CD's are - but you didn't.
> A similar problem occurs in case you want to have a nice set of fonts for a
> non-commercial project like a thesis. Of course font foundries are not
> intended to serve poor students...
Of course not, but I'm sure many foundries would look sympathetically at
the request for a cheap site licence for academic institutions.
It is not uncommon for such companies to provide kit free of charge, or at
least at substantially reduced rates.
> > Well let's see. I can order a 4-font family from the Monotype CD for
> > $75 (or less). The cost of acquiring locked CDs is not of concern to
> > me. Effectively it's 0 courtesy of the various freebies. In practice I
> > usually spend around $100/family since I insist on typefaces with full
>
> That is a resonable approximation. (At least in the US - here I have to pay
> for an unlock 80DM each cut)
This is true, in the UK single unlocks range from about GBP25-30, families:
Adobe Garamond (6 fonts) GBP179.00
Adobe Frutiger (9 fonts) GBP239.00
Berthold Frutiger (8 fonts) GBP209.00
Bitstream ITC Franklin Gothic 1 (4 fonts) GBP79.00
Bitstream Zurich 2 [Univers *clone*] (4 fonts) GBP79.00 (no apparent price
difference between licenced and unlicenced fonts)
Also CDs, I assumed that as the Berthold CD list price is $89.00, it would
sell for about $50.00, and thus be about GBP5.00, wrong! GBP99.00 from
FontWorks.
> > The cost of typesetting, even at these prices and ignoring inflation
> > is probably cheaper than it has ever been. With locked CDs and on-line
>
> In case of a small-scale project the font price is no longer negligible.
> You are correct with the question if that should be the case or if the font
> supplier must force the user to make money with the fonts.
But how small scale must it be not to be able to budget for DM80?
Of course it should be the case with fonts in a professional environment
that the cost of them should force the user to make a profit, surely this
is the case with other software too.
> My point is the question how to get a single (say 4-font) family at
> reasonable prices.
>
> Practice shows that it is easier to get "some fonts" (bonafide, but
> nevertheless useless, e.g. in a package) than something specific.
This of course proves their "real" value, as opposed to a standard price
per font.
...
> Linotype CD can be haven for free and then only unlocks count.
I think that was a limited offer, aimed at promoting GX, I think you now
have to pay for it.
> At the end I believe a similar approach like that which applies for
> high-performance
> computing has to be introduced. For more performance one has to pay more.
> Who can drive an entire service bureau with a single "printer" will have to
> pay more than an occasional user who writes marriage-invitations.
Sure, but what you are talking about is consumer product quality versus
"industrial strength", how does one differentiate the market, perhaps GX
now gives us this opportunity, I don't see how anyone is going to be able
to produce one of those cheaply.
> It is common practice that Linux is sold on CD, that a FTP archive is
> reproduced on CD &c. People pay for this! Therefore I believe it is a
> question of marketing and hope for the best: high quality fonts at
> reasonable prices....
So what is a reasonable price? I would like to think that you mean US
prices in Europe, which seem remarkably reasonable to me.
> And keep how many jobs of other "staff"? Adobe's products have a price of at
> least twice here in Europe compared to the States and support comes
> basically from overseas, developement too, I assume.
Ok, so what are you saying, that there should be a transfer of jobs from
the US to Europe? Please no!
For one thing, many of the original designs for typefaces have been
created in Europe, and there are several organisations whose fonts are
manufactured here, Letraset for example.
If on the other hand you require technical support in Europe, Adobe has
offices in Amsterdam, Den Haag, London(ish), Edinbrugh and Brusselles (I
think!), and as do (some) other type vendors.
Hilmar Schlegel
cl...@d-supp.demon.co.uk (Clive Bruton/Typonaut) writes:
> In article <1995040608...@semic.ipp-garching.mpg.de>,
> h...@semic.ipp-garching.mpg.de wrote:
>
>
>> > (me)
>> > Have Adobe ever thought about moving into the area of low res
>> fonts, isn't > it possible to restrict the output resolution in the PS
>> coding of the > font?
>>
>> For which purpose? To produce jam fonts to fill $10 font CD's ???
>>
>>
>
> No, to produce fonts for the mass market who do not require high
> resolution, thus giving access, integrity and quality without pawning the
> family silver.
>
Please excuse me that I put here again a point!
Haven't we learned meanwhile that getting the bonafide high quality font
programs from the main suppliers is economic and "easy" (at least in
"theory")? So that all effords to get "cheap" fonts as rip-off, fast-font
designs and whatever provide marginal savings as soon as the whole project
costs are above - to say a number - $500 or so.
Aside from this rethoric question I would like to add here that exact the
approach of low-res, locked high-res or otherwise restricted font programs
distracts me extremely. It provides some tool to press someone into
dependence on some proprietary mechanisms of the supplier and the great
(technological) idea to apply the digitized form of artwork in a wide field
is restricted by barriers.
I guess the investment for production of a "low-res" version of a good font
is not lower than for producing the high-res version. So low-res versions
are according to my opinion only of use to produce resolution matched bitmap
fonts to assist the bad rendering of outlines on pixel-devices.
Finally I could imagine that in the future possibly unhinted fonts could be
cheaper - for exclusicve usage on high-res devices.
Quixote Digital Typography
Ray Stricklin <ray_st...@tscnet.eskimo.com> wrote:
>EK>I never nurished the illusion that fonts are created effortessly and at
>EK>no expense. However, as an end user, I have the option to pay $29.95
>EK>or $24 x 1115 for comparable laser results I will go for the cheap and
>EK>legal solution. Sorry, life is tough for me too, you know.
>>As for these monolithic type companies, if they're rolling in so much
>>dough, then go to the local bookstore or library and look through
>>copies of Publish, Print, Step by Step, etc. and see how many ads
>>there are from Linotype, Monotype, Adobe (the type division: ads for
>>Photoshop, ILlustrator, Pagemaker, etc. don't count). Frequency and
>>size of ads tends to be directly proportional to their profitability.
>I thought the courts had settled this a _very_ long time ago..
>copyrighting a typeface is not legal. Copyrigting the name of that
>typeface, however, is perfectly fine. I don't see the problem we're
>having..
OK, the short story. First, there is no such thing as copyrighting a
name. People, it's not that hard to sort all of this out. The
following information is based on US law. Each country's IP
protections vary.
PATENTS provide protection for inventions and designs (although the
latter category of protection is harder to obtain and lasts less time
than an invention patent). Examples of things which are subject to a
patent would be the proverbial better mousetrap, or a design for a
lampshade (a design patent in this case). The patent process is very
long and expensive, and is centered around enriching patent lawyers.
In a less cynical mood, I'd also point out that the burden of proof on
originality of a patent happens when an invention or design is
patented. Occasionally, the US patent office grants absurd patents
which are later overturned or restricted. In the United States it is
possible to obtain a design patent for a typeface, but the process is
long, expensive and uncertain.
TRADEMARKS provide protection for names. The idea being to protect the
reputation that has been built up by someone in a name to prevent that
name from being misused. For example, the trademark protection behind
TeX and METAFONT is used to prevent anyone from calling a program TeX
or METAFONT which does not pass the validation tests for those
programs. Certain images may also be trademarked. It is essential that
trademark owners vigilantly protect their trademarks. If not, the
trademark may be deemed to have passed into the public domain. This
for example, is the why behind stories like the Disney corporation
ordering a grade school to remove a mural with Disney characters on
it. Trademarks have no expiration date beyond this falling into the
public domain.
COPYRIGHTS provide protection for "creative" works. The "creative" is
a rather amorphous term. A snapshot taken with an instant camera is
considered a creative work by the US registrar of copyrights. A
typeface is not. US copyright law explicitly denies copyright
protection to typefaces. In other countries, copyright protection is
extended to typefaces (the UK has the strongest law in place for
protecting typefaces).
The legal issues were never a point of debate here.
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
> COPYRIGHTS provide protection for "creative" works. The "creative" is
> a rather amorphous term. A snapshot taken with an instant camera is
> considered a creative work by the US registrar of copyrights. A
> typeface is not. US copyright law explicitly denies copyright
> protection to typefaces.
Which more than anything else is the point, typefaces are creative works,
all I ask is that they are treated on an equal footing with others.
I believe that the lack of protection of typefaces not only damages the
industry, but also discourages people from entering the market place. For
instance, I personally would rather design and work on projects with
restricted circulation than commit to the public domain, which is
virtually what wide circulation amounts to.
I'm not pretending to be the a great type designer, I would hope that
someday I may become "competant", but I think that I do have a
contribution to make, and it is one that I hope would enrich type design.
I'm not the only person that feels this way either, that collective of
type designers who choose not to work in this area, solely because of
copyright issues, must be a loss.
> In other countries, copyright protection is
> extended to typefaces (the UK has the strongest law in place for
> protecting typefaces).
It would be nice if they enforced them a little, sure there is a lack of
outright "clone" sellers, but there is plenty of "passing off".
>
> The legal issues were never a point of debate here.
>
Certainly no one is arguing about what *is* law, just trying to put the
point about what *should* be law. While demonstrating that similar
products enjoy much better protection.
Catherine Lardie
from Corel, but some of the people I support have been clamoring for a "true"
Helvetica. Maybe I should 'port it over from the Mac?
cheers
chris
(not catherine lardie)
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
h...@semic.ipp-garching.mpg.de wrote:
> In message 7 Apr 1995 19:17:56 +0100,
> cl...@d-supp.demon.co.uk (Clive Bruton/Typonaut) writes:
> > No, to produce fonts for the mass market who do not require high
> > resolution, thus giving access, integrity and quality without pawning the
> > family silver.
> Please excuse me that I put here again a point!
> Haven't we learned meanwhile that getting the bonafide high quality font
> programs from the main suppliers is economic and "easy" ...
Yes, 100% agree, so why do people buy clones?
> Aside from this rethoric question I would like to add here that exact the
> approach of low-res, locked high-res or otherwise restricted font programs
> distracts me extremely. It provides some tool to press someone into
> dependence on some proprietary mechanisms of the supplier and the great
> (technological) idea to apply the digitized form of artwork in a wide field
> is restricted by barriers.
I don't see that, if the fonts have the same naming conventions as hi-res
then you just send your files to the Bureau, and back they come.
> I guess the investment for production of a "low-res" version of a good font
> is not lower than for producing the high-res version.
No, it seems with current technology, that you have to do more work to
produce a good low-res font than a hi-res one.
> Finally I could imagine that in the future possibly unhinted fonts could be
> cheaper - for exclusicve usage on high-res devices.
>
They would be considerably cheaper.
Clive Bruton/Typonaut
ray_st...@tscnet.eskimo.com (Ray Stricklin) wrote:
> I thought the courts had settled this a _very_ long time ago..
> copyrighting a typeface is not legal. Copyrigting the name of that
> typeface, however, is perfectly fine. I don't see the problem we're
> having..
>
You obviously don't have a problem, you just want to buy cheap fonts,
others wish to see their industry flourish.
It will not do so without proper copyright protection for type.
The motive for this is not greed, only to have similar protection entitled
to other industries.