After performing a ‘Select Duplicates’ on some (OTF/TTF) of the mentioned fonts, and then scrolling through the list of fonts, I am able to find a great numbers of duplicate fonts that are not marked as duplicates, despite the fact that they, in my opinion/assessment, should be marked as duplicates. Most, but not all, with a Regular(No)-marking and very, very many of these clearly appear as italic fonts, and are, in various ways, Style-marked as such; e.g. ’ Italic’, ‘Italic’, ‘kursiv’(*, ‘Semibold Italic’ or ‘Semilet Italic’… etc. - without, necessarily, being Italic(Yes)-marked.
*) In Danish: ‘kursiv’ = Italic.
Below is a fairly representative selection of unmarked duplicate fonts, showing the values of the, hopefully, most important font attributes, relevant in this context.
(Please remark, that the lists are formated as a tabulated lists, with Courier New, 11 pt.)
- = Should have been selected as a duplicate.
Preview Family Style Regular Italic Symbol Mono Weight Version
-
Arial Regular Arial Regular Yes No No No Normal 1,100
Arial normal(* Arial normal Yes No No No Normal 7,000
*) ‘normal’ (also a Danish word) is, in this particular context, generally
considered to be Style-equivalent to the English ‘Regular’.
-
Arial Italic Arial Italic No Yes No No Normal 1,100
Arial kursiv Arial kursiv No Yes No No Normal 7,000
*) In Danish: ‘kursiv’ = Italic.
-
Arial Bold Arial Bold No No No No Bold 1,100
Arial fed(* Arial fed No No No No Bold 7,000
*) In Danish: ‘fed’ = Bold.
-
Arial Bold Italic Arial Bold Italic No Yes No No Bold 1,010
Arial fed kursiv Arial fed kursiv No Yes No No Bold 7,000
Century Bold Italic Century Bold Italic No Yes No No Bold 1,000
- Century BoldItalic Century BoldItalic No Yes No No Bold 1,000
Chantilly Bold Italic Chantilly Bold Italic No Yes No No Bold 1,000
- Chantilly BoldItalic Chantilly BoldItalic No Yes No No Bold 1,000
ChantillyLH Bold Italic ChantillyLH Bold Italic No Yes No No Bold 1,000
- ChantillyLH BoldItalic ChantillyLH BoldItalic No Yes No No Bold 1,000
-Na- ChantillyExp Bold Italic No Yes Yes No Bold 1,000
- -Na- ChantillyExp BoldItalic No Yes Yes No Bold 1,000
Preview Family Style Regular Italic Symbol Mono Weight Version
-
Helvetica Neue LT Com 36 Thin Italic Helvetica Neue LT Com 36 Thin Italic No No No No Light (250) 2,200
Helvetica Neue LT Com 36 Thin Italic Helvetica Neue LT Com 36 Thin Italic No Yes No No Light (250) 2,200
-
Versailles LT Com 76 Bold Italic Versailles LT Com 76 Bold Italic Yes No No No Bold 1,020
Versailles LT Com 76 Bold Italic Versailles LT Com 76 Bold Italic No Yes No No Bold 1,020
In addition to these fairly obvious missing duplicate markings, there are many other, less obvious, situations where, for example, a duplicate marking is missing or a duplicate marking can be considered incorrect.
Below you can see two examples of how duplicates can/should be marked based on slightly more complex criteria. Two examples (among several other types of duplicate errors) where it would be a great relief if one could be presented with a list of these slightly more complex duplicates; e.g. a ‘Select suspicious duplicates’ or ‘Select malformed fonts’ option. Especially in a workflow, like my current one, where a large amount of fonts have to be sorted and “cleaned out”.
= Selected as a duplicate, by MainType 12.0.
- = Should have been selected as a duplicate.
Preview Family Style Regular Italic Symbol Mono Kerning Weight Version
Achispado LT Std Regular Achispado LT Std Regular Yes No No No OTLF Normal 1,000
#+ Achispado LT Std Regular Achispado LT Std Regular Yes No No No None Normal 1,100
- Achispado LT Std Regular Achispado LT Std Regular Yes No No No None Normal 1,100
Here, it is my immediate assessment that I get a more well-functioning font that contains kerning information, rather than a font with minor corrections (from 1,000 to 1,100). The preview of the first font, with OTLF Kerning informations, actually looks better than the other two.
Preview Family Style Regular Italic Symbol Mono Weight Version
#+ Adobe Garamond Pro Bold Adobe Garamond Pro Bold No No No No Bold 1,007
#+ Adobe Garamond Pro Bold Adobe Garamond Pro Bold No No No No Bold 1,007
Adobe Garamond Pro Bold Adobe Garamond Pro Bold No No No No Bold 2,040
- Adobe Garamond Pro Bold Bold Adobe Garamond Pro Bold Bold No No No No Bold 1,005
Here, it is my immediate assessment that it doesn’t really make sense for a font to have a name with ‘Bold Bold’ in the name. This also applies to fonts with ‘Italic Italic’, ‘Regular Regular’ or ‘Light Light’, etc., in the font name.
That must be enough, for now…
(MainType 12.0 is, by the way, an excellent program. Perhaps I had hoped for more help from the program, but the complexity of the error possibilities in (more or less homemade) fonts is probably much greater than I had initially imagined; especially since there do not seem to be any hard-and-fast rules(?) for e.g. font naming, family naming and type designation.)
For your convenience, I have created a printer-friendly version, which is attached to this post.
Support, Error in ‘Select Dublicate’, Examples, MyLeife-Post 250308 3-59pm.pdf (85.8 KB)