From: bkph@kauai.ai.mit.edu (Berthold K.P. Horn)
Newsgroups: comp.fonts
Subject: Re: General Information
Date: 14 Oct 92 12:19:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: life.29335
In-reply-to: mitch@nosc.mil's message of 13 Oct 92 18:01:17 GMT


In article <1992Oct13.180117.1204@nosc.mil> mitch@nosc.mil (Ray Mitchell) writes:

   I'm new to this font business and would appreciate some information.
   In the windows 3.1 and Word For Windows 2.0 environment, why would I
   necessarily want True Type fonts as opposed to the many diverse fonts
   that came with the Adobe Type Manager?  

No real reason, unless you know of a font that happens to be available in TT
form but not in T1.  Or unless you don't have ATM - although it comes
bundled with everything these days, so its hard to imagine you don't have a
least a couple of copies....

   (I assume they are part of ATM but I actually got the package as part of
   Micrografx Designer).  

The 13 fonts that came with the bundled version of ATM are, of course, top
quality.  The large package of fonts that comes with Designer is another
issue.  These are not top quality fonts.  For example, there is no use of
hint replacement.  Although, they are a lot better than typical PD fonts.

There are many such large sets of fonts available cheap these days, some
taht come bundled with various products. These generally work OK, but are
often not top quality.

   If I indeed do want True Type, is there a True Type equivalent for most
   or all of these in a single package that is available?

There are about 13,000 fonts in T1 format, so it will be a while before
there are TT font `equivalents' of all of them.  But there seem now to be
equivalents to many of the `standard' printer fonts commonly used.

   I do realize that True Type is supposed to more closely represent what
   will actually get printed...

There is a religious war going on.  Ignore the hype.  Rendering quality
depends on how much work was put into the hinting of the font.  There are
plenty of lousy T1 fonts and plenty of lousy TT fonts.  Since hinting is
harder in TT format, you may in fact run into more shoddy jobs in TT fonts
rushed to the market.

   ...but is there any other difference such as efficiency?

It depends, initial on-screen rendering of T1 fonts is twice as fast as for TT.
(5 seconds for all characters in WingDings versus 2 seconds for all
characters in ZapfDingbats).  Presently ATM may be slower going to some
non-PS printers than TT, however.

There are many other issues, for example, TT fonts are converted to unhinted
T1 fonts when you print to a PS printer.  This means they will print fine
on that printer, but the file has the resolution of that printer wired in.
Printing at a different resolution will reduce rendering quality since the
outlines have been grid-fit to the originall printers' discrete grid.
And so on.

And avoid fonts that have been `converted' (in either direction).  Since
hinting is very different in the two formats, you will loose some quality
going in either direction.  You can verify this by `going round-trip'.

   Secondly, can you recommend some educational material for someone who
   would even ask a question like the above?

Nothing unbiased (:-)

   Thanks in advance,

Berthold K.P. Horn
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA