🚀 go-pugleaf

Kyle,

It's a lot easier if we can see large-size samples from both cases. That said, the larger font appears to be Myriad BF Cond. The smaller one is not clear and too small to examine clearly -- possibly Helvetica Comp. In any case, not the happiest of pairings.

Neil

Neil,

I wish I had a larger sample to show you. Unfortunately, this is the best I've got. That said, I think you're probably right about the Myriad. The second one is definitely harder to tell.

I'd definitely agree with your comment about "not the happiest of pairings." I won't bore you with the details of our internal conflicts about whether we should even be using this masthead at all.

I notice that the "masthead" on the BEPress web page uses a completely 
different font ...

The smaller one is definately Swiss721 Bold Condensed(on my PC) which would be a helvetica narrow equivalent I'd imagine.
It is a mystery why there would be two such similar fonts used. The only real difference are the S and R and a little bit of width which could be adjusted using horizontal scaling on a myriad if a "thinner" tag line was desired.

Yes, Herb, you're completely right. If it were up to me, the masthead you see on the webpage would be the masthead that we use for everything, but unfortunately, it's not up to me. :(

In case anyone is still interested, I finally got the original files from the original designer. The large font is GillSans Condensed Bold, and the smaller font in the tagline is Univers Condensed Bold.

Thanks for all your input!

Univers, that sneak! I swear that font haunts me, I don't own it and it always the one missing, unembedded, or some other thing when I open out-of-house files. Pops up like a bad apple. I always replace it with swiss721 cond too. Go figure.

Ha! Luckily, I do have a copy. Extra-lucky, because the font files the designer sent me are of no use to me (Mac fonts files, and I'm working on a PC). Incidentally, Swiss721 is one that I don't own! If I ever open any out-of-house files with Swiss 721, I'll be sure to replace it with Univers!

Kyle,

A word to the wise: please be aware that your designer generally cannot legally send or lend you his fonts any more than if it were his copy of Photoshop. They cannot be shared without this bordering on font piracy.

Thanks.

Neil

Hi Neil,

Thanks for the note. I was under the impression that something like this would generally be considered "fair use." For example, if I typeset a book, and I send it to a printer, I need to send the fonts to the printer, as well.

Of course, it's a non-issue in this particular case, since 1) I was not able to open or use the font files that the designer sent, and 2) I already have legal copies of the fonts in question, anyway.

Kyle

Kyle, 

      For example, if I typeset a book, and I send it to a printer, I need to
      send the fonts to the printer, as well.




Nope. It would be taboo if they're Adobe fonts or those from many other foundries unless the printer or service bureau already holds valid licenses for these fonts. (And yes, I see the irony of what I've just written.) See:
 <http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?7@@.ef602ce.3bc3af0c/1> for further discussion. A PDF workflow is your safest bet.

Neil

Thanks, Neil. That info is really helpful. I think, as you mentioned in the other thread you showed me, that many people don't realize that fonts are licensed software. I knew they were, but was uncertain on the details of the licensing.

PDF workflow it is. :)

Kyle,

Aside from the way many people perceive font software, there is also no particular consistency for how licensing works across foundries. So, there you are with a 32-page document, 14 different fonts from 5 different foundries, each with different EULAs, and you need to get the document to the printer now to make your client's deadline...

...with the inability to temporarily transfer some of those fonts to your printer simply for output, with his promise of destruction of the fonts upon successful plating. It could be a nightmare for even the most fastidious designer who might have 1,500-2,000 fonts or more, from two dozen different foundries to keep tabs on what he or she has, and what each font's specific licensing allows.

So, the only reasonable option then becomes to make a PDF of the final document, with embedded fonts. But, then, because of a few foundry restrictions, you find that some fonts cannot even be legally embedded.

Of course, you can generally have fonts tag along with your files for output if the service provider has the same font(s) from the same foundry(ies). Aside from perhaps the Adobe library, one cannot expect the local printer to have the font resources of myfonts.com sitting in a cabinet in his office.

So, there is no clear-cut, universal answer to the problem.

Trust that this is a difficult position for Adobe (and other foundries) to be in with their loyal licensed software users; having to balance protection of their intellectual property along with attempting to provide fair-use access to their software.

Personally, I would prefer the sheer convenience of an across-the-board simplification of type foundry EULAs to allow for the short-term/temporary transfer of fonts to legitimate service provider businesses (with the promise of destruction upon output; but not to colleagues, friends, or clients.

Neil

      Personally, I would prefer the sheer convenience of an across-the-board
      simplification of type foundry EULAs to allow for the short-term/temporary
      transfer of fonts to legitimate service provider businesses (with the
      promise of destruction upon output; but not to colleagues, friends, or
      clients.




That would make sense to me. One thing that I can't figure out: if you have a font that is so restricted that you cannot even legally embed it in a PDF file, what's the point? You can't use it for anything! At least, not anything productive!

Kyle,

True, if you can neither embed a particular font nor have it tag along with your files.

Neil

To really screw up the works, some font foundaries do NOT allow you to embed their fonts in a PDF. Of course, wise typographers refuse to buy fonts from those sources.

There's a great chart at

 <http://fontlab.wikidev.net/The_Case_for_a_User-Friendly_EULA>

listing the rights granted by 22 type foundries (including Adobe). I agree with Neil's suggestion of short-term transfer to service bureaus/printers only. That would keep both the letter and spirit of the law intact.

Thanks, Gary.

Interestingly, a number of the "suggestions" made in the accompanying article closely mirror points I've been making in the forums.

Neil