Web FontFonts 88 Responses

Last post: 2 years, 2 months ago | Thread started: Feb 24, 10, 12:45 p.m.

RespondNew TopicDisable Images

• lukus_W

  Seems far too expensive for me. For print, you're not charged more if you use the typeface to produce more copies - the fact that different licensing levels have been produced for the web seems overly opportunistic.

  How will they monitor usage and what will happen if too many people view your site, and you exceed your allotted page-views?

  If you've already bought typefaces - why should you have to pay for them again?

  Surely the type designer hasn't had to re-design these faces for the web .. I'd be willing to bet that they've just been run through a conversion program.

  • but still - it's a step in the right direction.– lukus_W1/3

    +1– fodcj2/3

    "I'd be willing to bet that they've just been run through a conversion program. " No.– Typographica3/3

  

  You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

  Cancel

  Dog-earFeb 24, 10, 1:24 p.m. – Permalink

• lukus_W

  Doesn't work with Safari or Chrome yet.

  • or Opera– lukus_W1/2

    Yep. Bug Webkit! In the meantime, you can send them to Typekit for free for Safari support.– Typographica2/2

  

  You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

  Cancel

  Dog-earFeb 24, 10, 1:28 p.m. – Permalink

• kalkal

  So whereas you'd normal buy a font the first time around and use it as many times in the future as you wish... now you have to charge the client for the privilege of using a font every time they wish to use it... crazy.

  • I agree. What a load of shit– fodcj

  

  You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

  Cancel

  Dog-earFeb 24, 10, 1:30 p.m. – Permalink

• neferiu

  I'd have to pay to have Google and all the russian sites crawling my site, too?

  

  You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

  Cancel

  Dog-earFeb 24, 10, 1:33 p.m. – Permalink

• Typographica

  There are no plans to monitor use. The licensing levels are there simply so CNN.com doesn't pay the same as joeblowblog.com. The base prices are cheaper than their OpenType versions.

  

  You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

  Cancel

  Dog-earMar 1, 10, 10:56 p.m. – Permalink

• jimbojones

  as fun as it is, the plan sounds like "there will be enough idiots who will buy it, so why not"
  1. most fonts are not worth it, the hinting is utter crap, FF DIN looks like fucking Arial under 16px

  2. the format is a joke, doesn't work in most browsers and you can only use it for web, I mean wtf
  if only it had an advantage over the simple raw TTF (if you want to whine about hinting) but it is just a measure to keep it off the print use. you can compress TTF just as much as an EOT and still use it for print, but that wouldn't be a ripoff then.

  3. bad (well not mine at least) choices for the features that are left in the fonts, like OSF etc.

  if I were a font house which praises itself to be so very innovative and whatnot, I would give the customer with one purchase the following: the super duper OTF (not the Pro mind you, although in this day and age it is laughable to call cyrillic and greek support a pro feature) the TTF, the PS and the EOT/WOFF/whatever web crap they will come up next. Maybe it will make the price go higher, but at least I won't have that feeling that someone wants to fuck me over and over again. I understand that it's a lot of work to rehint the existing fonts for web (and as of now it's been not too successful) but if the upcoming fonts will be splitted too, I'll never buy another FF font.

  • yeah, it seems like an expensive band-aid fix until technology solves this one down the line.– airey

  

  You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

  Cancel

  Dog-earMar 2, 10, 2:20 a.m. – Permalink

• Typographica

  > FF DIN looks like fucking Arial under 16px

  What page are you looking at and in what browser?

  > doesn't work in most browsers

  That's a strange statement given that Web FontFonts work in IE and Firefox 3.6. And Safari and Chrome via Typekit. What are the "most browsers" you refer to?

  > bad (well not mine at least) choices for the features that are left in the fonts

  OSF would be nice, yes, but web designers would be far more upset if they didn't have access to the lining figures. That's why OSF are optional in the Small Caps. Believe me, I'd rather see all figure styles remain, but this is a limitation of CSS, not the fonts. Fortunately OT features are in the CSS3 font module and Mozilla plans to support them. Other browsers should too. http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-fonts/…

  

  You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

  Cancel

  Dog-earMar 3, 10, 12:03 a.m. – Permalink