If your intention is to make a nice piece of clipart with Illustrator, you need take things no further.
If you want to make a nice font, your Illustrator image is only a source, not a finished image. Spend less time perfecting the source graphic, and spend more time editing that source graphic with the font editor. No matter how detailed your source is, it will not import without some distortion. I'm not even sure that the source graphic and the vector will be of identical size - mine get reduced by about 6%, when importing.
There's an easy way to tell. using Microsoft Word. Generate a source graphic at the size you expect to be 72 points. After generating the fonts, install and select it. Add the source graphic to a Word doc, (insert -> Image -> From file), then type the font glyphs next to it at 72 points, and compare sizes.
Frankly, having inspected modern fonts here and there, I think the editors are very problematic to use and most of those fonts, if correct for small weight, look dreadfull once enlarged. I don't see how shapes can ever go perfectly right with that grid system, tell me if i am wrong...
The source graphic you make with Illustrator is only the starting point, if you want to make a good quality font. In ScanFont 3
, which I use, the vector can be enlarged to the extent that changes can be made, equivalent to 1/96th of an inch at 864 points, (equivalent to 1/6912 of an inch/ about 1/2720 of a centimeter, at 72 points). Trying to judge things like parallel lines by eye is not going to give you accurate results, when the vector in enlarged, or reduced in size. Think of it like dividing numbers, but with a remainder
, rather than a decimal, if the quotient is not a whole number. Example:
You create a line that is supposed to have a slope of 3:1, but it's slightly off, (3,019/1,003), so the actual value is 3.00997:1, or slightly less than 1% error. The font editor will spread the excess value of 10 over the 1,003 distance, and the error will be almost impossible to notice. If you make the image 20% as large, the excess of 10 will be spread over about 251, making the error percentage 4%, instead of 1. Sometimes that 1/ 6912 variation at 72 points will be very noticeable at some, but not all, smaller point sizes, particularly with a straight horizontal or vertical line. The font editor will realize that the line is not exactly straight, and will assume that you wanted it to be that way. The font editor has no capacity for intuition; it doesn't correct your mistakes, it assumes that your mistakes are correct, and adjusts accordingly.
Many fonts are designed specifically to be used within a certain point size range. There aren't many script fonts that look good below 18-24 points, and there aren't many bitmap fonts that look good at larger than 72 points.
Don't blame the font editor
, when fonts don't scale well. Blame the person who edited the font.
The letters look hand drawn, or printed from wood or metal type. It explains the rough edges and some small ink blots. Most of the letters have different heights and/ or baselines, suggesting further that this is not a font sample. I see "Roman Caps" from the clipped text at the bottom, as well.
Previously identified here: http://www.dafont.com/forum/read/86374/font
Edited 2 times. Last edit on Jul 06, 2013 at 20:49 by metaphasebrothel
The image changes to a vector when you import it into a font editing program. This vector is not an exact reproduction of the image you made in Illustrator, it is a reasonable facsimile. If you want the vector to exactly reproduce the imported image, you need to edit the vector.
Anything on DaFont
that would be suitable should be found among the Basic -> Fixed Width
I'd wager my left nut that there's a Manfred Klein
font that looks quite a bit like Pterra
, but it must be one of the several thousand fonts of his that aren't available at DaFont
. Try looking in the Manfred Klein Fonteria
. There should be a text sample for each of the available downloads. You can save time by not looking in the Picture Fonts
You can not change the height of the glyphs with the vertical metrics...
Yes, it can be done, but perhaps not with FontCreator
. It CAN be done with FontLab Studio5
. The procedure involves making two separate changes the the UPM size, and also some changes to the True Type specific metrics.
sent me a tutorial on how to do it, as I had expressed interest in creating a conventional
sized version of my current font project. I've tested his method, and it works. That's the sort of thing I would do as the very last step before completing the font, because while editing, the larger size of glyphs that I use is a decided advantage.
You would need to alter the vertical metrics, to change the height of the glyphs. I don't know if you can do that with FontForge. It's not really something that should be encouraged, either. Instead of modifying someone else' work to suit your purposes, you really ought to make your own fonts. That way, the height, spacing, centering, etc. will be exactly the way you want them to be, or as close as you can get, with your skill level.
The updated version hasn't been posted yet, SELECTA. If it had, on the details page, to the right of "First seen on DaFont: May 05, 2013", you would see "Last updated: XXX XX, XXXX".
As close to zero width as is possible:
at 9 points.
, here is the Themes
page for dafont: http://www.dafont.com/themes.php
. For a Flyer or advertisement, I would avoid
the following themes, for the most part:
, traditional Gothic
-> Fixed Width, Script
-> School, Trash and Graffiti, and Fancy
-> Typewriter, Destroy, Curly, and Distorted.
You'd want to chose something that's easy to read quickly, and from a distance, so many of the Calligraphy
and most cursive text fonts are not good choices.
You'll probably find something good in Fancy
-> Old School, Basic
-> Sans Serif, or Script
-> Brush or Various. Then again, you might find exactly what you want in one of the themes I've suggested that you avoid!
Take a look at some of the samples in the Font Identification forum. If you see one you like, follow up on the Designer information through the links provided when rocamaco
identifies it. Many designers make a number of similar fonts, or different styles/ weights of the same font family.
Click on the banner with the text display, to see the details page for the font. For Gravity
, the page is http://www.dafont.com/gravity.font
. Under the Note of the Author
, but above the graphic and character map, you'll see when the font was first seen on dafont, and when it was last updated. For Gravity
, it was first seen on dafont on April 12, 2013, and last updated on June 14, 2013.
Updated fonts no longer appear on the first pages of New Fonts. Certain designers were making updates to their fonts every few days, mainly to stay on the front pages. People end up downloading multiple versions of the same font, and the uploader's statistics become inflated, giving the appearance that the font is more popular than it really is.
I suppose if someone was to make a major update to one of their fonts, they could make a forum post about it. Ideally, someone should not upload their font until after it's complete.
@JeremyWoods: Are you using the maximum enlargement View setting when you try to do this?
So, if I understand you correctly, you want to put hot links to dafont on your website, so when people click the download link on your site, you won't be using any of your own bandwidth, because they will receive the file from dafont. That way, people can obtain files from dafont, without having to go to dafont to get them.
Gee, can you see a reason why dafont would not want you to be able to do this?
Son, no one's going to make a font for you from source graphics less than one eighth of an inch high. Smarten up.
I think Analia gave up font making after some extremely rude comments were made by koeiekat about her John Lennon handwriting font in the forum at abstractfonts, some years ago.
... how do I lose that whole 'poor man's' bit? ...
I took a quick look at a few of the glyphs from Overseer
using ScanFont 3
. I think the following would be improvements:
1) The spacing for per cent
on the right side is horrendous. Two seconds of work can fix that.
2) The angle of the diagonal stem on the 7 is off slightly, on both sides, by about the same amount. It should have a slope of 7:1, but it's a little less than that. I would move the nodes on the bottom slightly to the right.
3) The numbers that have rounded tops should be raised slightly, or the numbers with horizontal tops should be lowered slightly. Although the heights are
the same, the ones with horizontal tops look taller.
Note that the distance between the two blue horizontal lines is identical, (figure 2), but it doesn't look
identical, (figure 1).
Nice font, Jaynz. You are truly the poor man's Ray Larabie.
All times are CEST. The time is now 12:39