Goudita SF font

Please try to keep all the discussions in the main forums on topic! If you have anything else, related to fonts, you want to share, please post it here!
Post Reply
William
Top Typographer
Top Typographer
Posts: 2038
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 6:41 pm
Location: Worcestershire, England
Contact:

Goudita SF font

Post by William »

I recently produced the following pdf document in relation to trying out the Public Domain Designs 1 font, for which font there is a thread in the Gallery.

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ngo/g ... 001001.pdf

I used Serif PagePlus X2 to produce the pdf.

The idea was to have two columns, each with the same text, yet set using different fonts, one an ordinary text font and the other the Public Domain Designs 1 font.

I chose the Goudita SF font for the ordinary text display. That choice was because I like the design of the font, it is a Venetian Roman and, as some readers may know, I like Venetian Roman fonts.

Anyway, it turned out that the font used is flagged as bold in the Adobe Reader File Properties... Fonts display. Yet I did not use a bold font in the design.

The computer has both regular and bold installed, the fonts being in files named goit.ttf and goitb.ttf respectively. I have looked at the fonts using FontCreator 5.6 and have found nothing wrong that I can say is wrong, though I did notice that goit.ttf has Units per em at 1000 and goitb.ttf has Units per em at 4096.

I am wondering if the goit.ttf font is faulty and has been substituted without informing me.

While preparing this post I remembered a similar problem with the following font.

Firenze SF

The regular and bold are in the files flot.ttf and flotb.ttf respectively.

I have just looked at the Format Settings... Units per em values of those two fonts and, just like the Goudita SF files, there are values of 1000 and 4096 respectively.

Can anyone analyse what is happening with these fonts please?

William Overington

1 October 2008
Erwin Denissen
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11108
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 12:41 am
Location: Bilthoven, The Netherlands
Contact:

Post by Erwin Denissen »

I don't have these fonts installed so I can't look into it. What do you see when you copy and paste text from the PDF to a new document?
Erwin Denissen
High-Logic
Proven Font Technology
William
Top Typographer
Top Typographer
Posts: 2038
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 6:41 pm
Location: Worcestershire, England
Contact:

Post by William »

Erwin Denissen wrote:What do you see when you copy and paste text from the PDF to a new document?
Thank you for your reply.

Copying from the pdf and pasting into WordPad produces the following in 72 point, which was the size used in the .ppp source document used to produce the pdf.

abcde
bc;ad
aedcb
;ecb;
;;a;;
abcde
bc;ad
aedcb
;ecb;
;;a;;

The first five lines are bold and the next five lines are regular. The fonts are purported to be GouditaSFBold and PublicDomainDesigns1, though it looks like Arial.

WordPad knows the original fonts as Goudita SF and Public Domain Designs 1, not as GouditaSFBold and PublicDomainDesigns1 so it looks like it is treating them as unknown fonts and substituting Arial.

William Overington

1 October 2008
Bhikkhu Pesala
Top Typographer
Top Typographer
Posts: 9873
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 5:28 am
Location: Seven Kings, London UK
Contact:

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala »

I don't see this problem if I export Goudita SF Regular to a PDF. It may be that your font registry is corrupted.

I see the same problem copy Rich Text from the PDF — it pastes as Arial Bold.

This is more likely to be a problem with naming than with funit/em values

Postscript names - Unique font identifiers

GouditaSF - Altsys Fontographer 3.5 Goudita Regular
GouditaSFBold - FontMonger:Goudita SF Bold

The SF fonts are not good. I remove them all after installing Serif products. The mere fact that they don't share the same funit/em values indicates that they have dubious origins. 1000 is common for Mac fonts, while 4096 indicates a font originating on the Windows platform or produces in a Windows font editor.

To be frank, they're more trouble than they're worth.
My FontsReviews: MainTypeFont CreatorHelpFC15 + MT12.0 @ Win 10 64-bit build 19045.2486
William
Top Typographer
Top Typographer
Posts: 2038
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 6:41 pm
Location: Worcestershire, England
Contact:

Post by William »

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:I don't see this problem if I export Goudita SF Regular to a PDF. It may be that your font registry is corrupted.
Thank you for replying.

Ah. If the font registry is corrupted, what can I do about it please?

Is it enough to uninstall fonts and then install them again, or does something particular need to be done to uncorrupt the font registry?

The computer has Windows xp professional running on it.

William Overington

1 October 2008
William
Top Typographer
Top Typographer
Posts: 2038
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 6:41 pm
Location: Worcestershire, England
Contact:

Post by William »

I have made a few changes and things seem to be working properly now.

I removed some of my test fonts from the fonts directory. These were fonts such as Whiteboard Venetian 002 and so on made and installed as I went along developing a font, no longer in use yet still in the fonts directory. This was in case there are too many fonts in the fonts directory, though there are still a lot of fonts in the directory. I deleted the four SF fonts which I mentioned, noticing, curiously, that Goudita SF was purportedly in twice, both as goit.ttf and the one not having (TrueType) beneath the name and one having (TrueType) beneath the name. I deleted the first but the second would not delete as it was allegedly not there. So I rebooted the computer and then installed the four fonts one by one from copies issued with the Serif PagePlus X2 program. Many of the Serif fonts are the same from version to version of the program, though some are removed and others are added, and they do redate the files, though not the fonts. I made a point of installing the regular before installing the bold, just in case there might be a problem otherwise.

Anyway, I then tried making further versions of the pdf mentioned earlier and got the desired fonts used in the pdfs rather than the bold versions.

Goudita SF in the following.

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ngo/g ... 001002.pdf

Firenze SF in the following.

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ngo/g ... 001003.pdf

William Overington

1 October 2008
Post Reply