Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Help tweaking Font Forge metadata

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Help tweaking Font Forge metadata

    I'm finishing my first font and I'm wondering about what I should do about the metadata. I'm especially interested the "PS Names".
    So as far as names go, I see "Fontname", "Family Name", "Name For Humans" and then the file name. I take it that the file name is only important for the person manipulating the file using file system tools. It seems the "Family Name" is what appears in the software that selects the fonts. So that leaves "Fontname" and "Name For Humans"? How do they affect anything?
    As for the rest of the metadata, I think I know what to do w/"General", "TTF Names" seems to be prefilled, "Comment" and "FONTLOG" speak for themselves and I've made heavy use of "Lookups"|"GPOS", but everything else is a mystery. Can anyone explain them?
    I'm working on a TTF font. It only has one case, and all the real glyphs are located in the upper case 7-bit ASCII range, plus 5 lower case characters. I have references all over the BMP.

  • #2
    Helvetica is an example of a font family name.
    Helvetica-Bold is an example of a font name (no spaces).
    Helvetica Bold is an example of how it might be listed in the "Name for Humans" field (spaces are OK) and how many newer programs will list it.
    Helvetica.otf is an example of a file name (which is just the name of the font file ).

    I use FontLab, so I'm a bit unfamiliar with FontForge's input boxes. In general, though, this stuff is frustrating in any font-development app due to legacy and compatibility issues. One software company handles fonts one way, then switches to another a few years later. Their competitor does it another way, then develops a proprietary system that they subsequently abandon only to sell it to a third company that integrates it with what they've done without making it backward-compatible with anyone else's ways of doing things. Agggghhh!

    This has been going on for years, and every attempt at standardization introduces yet another set of complexities. The end result being a whole lot of frustration for font designers who need to come up with all kinds of kludgy workarounds to get their fonts listed correctly, with the right names and in the right order and in the same families across different operating system platforms and from one program to the next and from one version of that program to the next. It's sort of a mess.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by B View Post
      Helvetica is an example of a font family name.
      Helvetica-Bold is an example of a font name (no spaces).
      Helvetica Bold is an example of how it might be listed in the "Name for Humans" field (spaces are OK) and how many newer programs will list it.
      Helvetica.otf is an example of a file name (which is just the name of the font file ).
      Well, I'm not doing those other styles: no italics, no bold, no O's w/smiley faces in them... what I am doing is creating a font that will have "Authentic" in its name, because it is faithful to the original rendering, and another w/"Polished" because I think it looks better. I'm not sure how software would handle non-conventional style names.

      I use FontLab, so I'm a bit unfamiliar with FontForge's input boxes. In general, though, this stuff is frustrating in any font-development app due to legacy and compatibility issues. One software company handles fonts one way, then switches to another a few years later. Their competitor does it another way, then develops a proprietary system that they subsequently abandon only to sell it to a third company that integrates it with what they've done without making it backward-compatible with anyone else's ways of doing things. Agggghhh!

      This has been going on for years, and every attempt at standardization introduces yet another set of complexities. The end result being a whole lot of frustration for font designers who need to come up with all kinds of kludgy workarounds to get their fonts listed correctly, with the right names and in the right order and in the same families across different operating system platforms and from one program to the next and from one version of that program to the next. It's sort of a mess.
      Might the problem be less severe if I'm not using a lot of features? Other than what's obvious so far, the only other feature I'm using is a kerning table (which, incidentally, FF has trouble producing if I generate the font on certain computers). I'm going for maximum compatibility in this.

      Comment


      • #4
        Again, it's something of a legacy issue from when digital fonts on desktop computers typically came in four standard weights: regular, italic, bold and bold italic. Getting all the fonts in a family to appear listed in the correct order in an end user's program font menu requires jumping through some hoops -- especially when there are more than four weights. I won't get into that, though, since you're working with two fonts that seemingly aren't related to weights.

        In your situation, I'd probably be inclined to treat each font as a separate family, so they'll be listed as separate entries in a typical application's font menu. Then I'd list each as the regular weight of that family, even if you don't include the word regular in the font names themselves (which isn't necessary). I'd probably resist the urge to include both in the same family because you'd be forced to specify that one of them was bold or italic or bold italic when, judging from what you said, that isn't the case.

        So for example:

        Font family names: WhateverPolished and WhateverAuthentic
        Font names: Whatever Polished and Whatever Authentic
        Name for humans (how they're listed in an application's menu): Whatever Polished and Whatever Authentic
        File name: WhateverPolished.ttf and WhateverAuthentic.ttf

        Like I mentioned, though, I don't use FontForge, so don't regard what I'm saying as the final word on how FontForge expects things to be done. Once you've compiled your two fonts, be sure to test them out in as many different programs as possible to see if everything appears correctly in the program's font menus. If you can do this both on a Mac and a PC, it would be good.

        Might the problem be less severe if I'm not using a lot of features? Other than what's obvious so far, the only other feature I'm using is a kerning table (which, incidentally, FF has trouble producing if I generate the font on certain computers). I'm going for maximum compatibility in this.
        Yes and no. Those extra features, like ligatures or old-style numerals or whatever aren't really related to the naming conventions of the fonts, but they do present their own set of problems, as you're finding out with the kerning pair tables. Some of the things in what FontForge calls meta data are likely XUID numbers, vendor codes, Type 1 issues, TrueType VDMX and PCLT tables, etc. Those things aren't part of the naming conventions either. I suspect FontForge will automatically fill in a bunch of those kinds of things for you based on its best guess made from how you've built the font.

        For what it's worth, the font naming convenion information in this link is specific to FontLab, but with a little juggling of terminology, it applies to most any font creation software: https://forum.fontlab.com/fontlab-st...d04c54adb10caa

        Like I said, it's a messy subject.
        Last edited by B; 09-04-2017, 02:53 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          In that case, FF isn't getting the names right, because the "family" is what appears in the software. 'No idea what becomes of "Name for Humans".
          So what about the other metadata? Like "Layers"? "StyleSet Names"? "Grid Fitting"? ...to name a few

          Comment

          Search

          Collapse

          Sponsor

          Collapse

          Incredible Stock

          Latest Topics

          Collapse

          • Glitchin
            Reply to What kind and which book would it be wise to spend on?
            Glitchin
            Work for money design for love by David Airey and Know Your Onions: Graphic Design by Drew De Soto are good books for freelancers if your just starting out in the industry.

            Also Pretty Much...
            Today, 03:55 PM
          • Glitchin
            Comment on Logo Feedback
            Glitchin
            I'm confused. This is one of your designs from your original post right? I meant if you could post an image of the logo the client liked, it might help. "They provided me a Logo they want it...
            Today, 03:24 PM
          • Glitchin
            Reply to Critique Please?
            Glitchin
            This is the latest version. I have thickened the CF and lowered the weight of the sound....
            Today, 02:58 PM
          • Glitchin
            Comment on Critique Please?
            Glitchin
            Hey thanks for the feedback.

            I have tried what you're suggesting with shapes rather than lines, but it didn't work for me.

            That's the challenge, making it looking like CF whilst...
            Today, 02:54 PM
          • PrintDriver
            Reply to Portfolio usage of work
            PrintDriver
            Nice article B, and illustrates my point about being an LLC or a sole proprietor. The LLC is a business entity separate from your personal life. With sole proprietorship, all of your belongings and assets...
            Today, 12:42 PM
          GDF A division of Mediabistro Holdings Adweek | Mediabistro | Clio | Film Expo Group Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy Copyright 2016 Mediabistro Holdings
          Working...
          X