Discussion:
[GFD] Thomas Phinney and Libre Fonts plus Font Quality continued
vernon adams
2013-10-28 16:41:45 UTC
Permalink
Of course, there is no theoretical reason, and no-one has actually said that there should be a reason. The only good reasons i could cite, if i was debating this issue, is that often fonts from from the ‘libre worlds’ are developed within a very different framework to fonts developed in the traditional commercial / proprietary worlds. So, software from the libre world is often developed within a ‘release early’ or ‘open development’ framework. In my own experience, fonts i have published have been initially published only after just a few weeks development time; then the more usage they attract the more time i put into refining and improving them. If anyone thinks that’s not a good idea, i don’t care :) because i am pretty secure in my reasons for developing fonts in this way.

But, I think my main unhappiness with the now usual criticisms against these fonts in question (and no-one ever names them!?) is that there seems to be an assumption that if a Libre font lacks a certain ‘quality’ then it represents some kind of ‘font industry problem’ that needs to be adressed by a range of measures, from some kind of "educating the public" to recognise and disregard these fonts, to some kind of ‘naming and shaming’ of individual designers. I can’t see any mileage in those sort of responses; the complainers just look at best out of touch, at worst, mean-spirited.

-v
Quality, creativity, libre license.... There is no theoretical reason you can't have all of these things with a single typeface, even if there may be dynamics in play that tend to make creativity and libre licensing correlate negatively with quality, on average.
vernon adams
2013-10-29 16:30:01 UTC
Permalink
Rich, your directness makes me laugh :D

There’s something of The Onion about all this; “Local man thoroughly unimpressed by 30–40% of commercial fonts”. Didn’t they once run a story “Local man shuns restaurant because of bad kerning in menu”?

also, talking of keeping objective, which is the lesser font quality; a font that ‘sucks’? or a font that ‘stinks’?

-v
"I am pretty harsh about font quality. Most of the fonts I have made have never shipped, because my conceptions of quality early on outstripped my ability to execute at that quality level. So I will be the first to say that there are plenty of commercial fonts that suck. Easily 30–40% of commercial fonts leave me thoroughly unimpressed. If you look at libre fonts, and use the Google Fonts collection as your baseline, maybe 65% of those fonts suck. If you just look at all free fonts on dafont, maybe 95% of those fonts stink."
Bet the statement above got a big round of applause at ATYPI!
You can say it ain't so over and over again till you are blue in the face but this is about "my shit doesn't stink but yours does".
Vernon Adams
2013-11-02 15:50:07 UTC
Permalink
Challenge time :)
I’ll run it through Kernagic, you do it ‘your way'. We can judge whether the results are useful.

-v
Josefin's spacing is indeed out of whack. I agree with TP that it's broken
vernon adams
2013-11-02 20:29:06 UTC
Permalink
Chrome says ==

"The Website Ahead Contains Malware!
Google Chrome has blocked access to webfonts101.com for now.

What is the current listing status for webfonts101.com?
Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this web site may harm your computer.

Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 1 time(s) over the past 90 days.

What happened when Google visited this site?
Of the 1 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 1 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2013-09-16, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2013-09-16."


:)
http://webfonts101.com/josefink/josefink-reg.htm
Kisan Mehta
2013-11-03 03:52:15 UTC
Permalink
UNSUBSCRIBE
Kisan Mehta
Save Bombay Committee,Prakruti and Life Foundation
1203,Kanchanjanga "A", Plot 20, Sector 11, Koparkhairane,
Navi Mumbai 400709 Maharashtra India
WWW.savebombaycommittee.org
Kisan Mehta:9223448857
Post by vernon adams
Chrome says ==
"The Website Ahead Contains Malware!
Google Chrome has blocked access to webfonts101.com for now.
What is the current listing status for webfonts101.com?
Site is listed as suspicious - visiting this web site may harm your computer.
Part of this site was listed for suspicious activity 1 time(s) over the past 90 days.
What happened when Google visited this site?
Of the 1 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 1 page(s)
resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user
consent. The last time Google visited this site was on 2013-09-16, and the
last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2013-09-16."
:)
http://webfonts101.com/josefink/josefink-reg.htm
Loading...