Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Discuss FontCreator here, please do not post support requests, feature requests, or bug reports!
Psymon
Posts: 361
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Psymon » Sat Dec 08, 2018 2:44 pm

Okay! Here's a super-quickie sample of my masterpiece(s) -- er, well, in my own mind they're masterpieces, anyway (your mileage may vary) :lol: -- just a very simple overview of what my four fonts are that I've been working on for years now...

Alde Broadside (2018-12-08).jpg
Alde Broadside (2018-12-08).jpg (286.45 KiB) Viewed 2645 times

I haven't got the slightest clue what to do about how to go about naming them in the font properties box so that they're all together. As it is, I can get the regular and italic fonts together in the same family (so that when you're using them in software, you can select "Alde" and then from there choose "regular" or "italic"), but I don't know how to get the caps font, nor the blackletter font, included within that "Alde" group, too.

Like, to me, I think it would be ideal to see "Alde" listed as my font family, and then from there you can choose

- Regular
- Italic
- Caps
- Blackletter

...but when I try to lump them together like that, with "Alde" as my family, strange things start happening when I specify "Caps" and "Blackletter" as the subfamily (typing those in manually, as neither of those options are in the drop-down menu) for those two respective fonts.

When I do that, and install them, using the type tool in Photoshop I see "Alde" in the font list, and then the usual additional menu which includes regular, italic, and also blackletter -- but the caps is nowhere to be found -- not in the Alde family, nor as a separate font elsewhere (that I could find, anyway). It's like it just disappeared.

But then in MainType (v. 2.1), when I look at my fonts in there, I see all four of them, but the blackletter one displays like the regular one! It comes out just fine in Photoshop, looking as it should. Here's a screenshot of that -- the highlighted one is what should be displaying as my blackletter font..

MainType.jpg
MainType.jpg (153.3 KiB) Viewed 2645 times

Should I not be trying to do it this way, trying to lump them all together like that? Should those other two fonts -- the caps and the blackletter -- really be considered entirely different, separate fonts, not even of the same "family"? To me, they are all the same family -- they're historical fonts created from the type designs of the 16th-century printer, John Alde, so I would think that they all "belong together," and that people would use them together, but maybe I'm wrong about what a font "family" really is, I don't know.

Thanks a bunch, in advance, as always! :)

Bhikkhu Pesala
Top Typographer
Top Typographer
Posts: 8735
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 5:28 am
Location: Seven Kings, London UK
Contact:

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala » Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:28 pm

Small Caps would be more appropriate than Caps.

Black Letter and Small Caps are different font families. Trying to force all four into one font family is not a good solution. Black Letter is not Alde Bold.
My FontsReviews: MainTypeFont CreatorHelpFC13 Pro + MT9.0 @ Win10 1909 build 18363.900

Erwin Denissen
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 8790
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 12:41 am
Location: Bilthoven, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Erwin Denissen » Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:44 pm

Here is a tutorial that explains how to make fonts work like a family:
Font Family Settings
Erwin Denissen
High-Logic
Proven Font Technology

Psymon
Posts: 361
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Psymon » Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:49 pm

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:
Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:28 pm
Small Caps would be more appropriate than Caps.
Well, I just called it "caps" because my caps are actually smaller than even petite caps.
Black Letter and Small Caps are different font families. Trying to force all four into one font family is not a good solution. Black Letter is not Alde Bold.
I kinda realized that, too, although in a historical sense that's how one would often see them used (before there was such a thing as "bold" fonts).

Nevertheless, we're no longer in the olden days, and so I guess it would really be wrong to try to group them together under the same family? And my smallcaps (or smaller-than-petite caps), too? Or could that one indeed be included under the "Alde" family?

And as for naming that latter, in light of my font being smaller-than-petite, I wasn't really sure what to call it -- calling it either "Alde Small Caps" or "Alde Petite Caps" just seemed somewhat misleading, since technically it's neither of those (if one is nit-picky about such things). But if one were to just use the term rather loosely, then I suppose "Alde Smallcaps" would do -- if you do think that "Alde Caps" isn't clear.

I was thinking, too, that they kind-of looked almost like Uncials -- maybe I could call them "Alde Uncials"? Of my four fonts, this one was basically my own invention (based on the regular font).

Whaddaya think of think of that, Bhikkhu? You're fairly familiar with these early fonts. :)

Psymon
Posts: 361
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Psymon » Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:01 pm

Erwin Denissen wrote:
Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:44 pm
Here is a tutorial that explains how to make fonts work like a family:
Font Family Settings
Oh, thank you for that link, too, Erwin. I guess I can see my smallcaps (or whatever it ends up being called) fitting in with my regular and italic one, but looking at the chart on that page, I'm now thinking that my blackletter font is just TOO different from the others to really be grouped with the others.

I guess that is a question -- should I keep it totally separate? Or would it be okay to keep with the others in the same family, even though it does look TOTALLY different? Then again, my regular and italic fonts look quite different, too -- like, the italic isn't just a "leaned over" version of the regular, but various characters are totally dissimilar (for example the lowercase "w" and "v").

Should I make them completely separate fonts as well, for that same reason?

Back to my blackletter, my original name for that font was, in fact, "Wickednesse" -- the name came from the grimoire that Alde printed in 1561 entitled "The Wickednesse of Magicall Sciences," and I thought that name rather reflected the look of the font (and the context of its original use). I kinda like that name better than "Alde Blackletter," although if one is using all the fonts together, then you're going from one end of your font list to the other (from "A" to "W") when changing the font.

That is indeed a pain -- I know from LOTS of experience now ;) -- but at the same time, I kinda do feel rather affectionate about the name "Wickednesse," so I'm not sure what to do.

I guess that's for me to decide, of course -- just sharing a little conundrum I have over the name of that particular font. :roll:

Bhikkhu Pesala
Top Typographer
Top Typographer
Posts: 8735
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 5:28 am
Location: Seven Kings, London UK
Contact:

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala » Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:58 pm

Italic glyphs are different to regular glyphs. Modern fonts with "italics" that are just slanted should be called "oblique." I see no problem with grouping Alde Regular in the same family as Alde Italic.

If you keep the name Alde Black Letter, at least the fonts will appear next to each other in font lists, whereas if you rename it as Wickedness the relationship will be lost.
My FontsReviews: MainTypeFont CreatorHelpFC13 Pro + MT9.0 @ Win10 1909 build 18363.900

Psymon
Posts: 361
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Psymon » Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:48 pm

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:
Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:58 pm
Italic glyphs are different to regular glyphs. Modern fonts with "italics" that are just slanted should be called "oblique." I see no problem with grouping Alde Regular in the same family as Alde Italic.
Well, that's good. I wonder, though, from a practical standpoint (i.e. the end-user's standpoint), if I was to end up "ungrouping" the blackletter and the small caps fonts, then might it be better to also leave the regular and italic fonts also ungrouped, too, rather than have two of my fonts grouped together, and two not?
If you keep the name Alde Black Letter, at least the fonts will appear next to each other in font lists, whereas if you rename it as Wickedness the relationship will be lost.
I do see your point about that, re the blackletter -- and that's something I've been mulling over for the longest time, too (if only because I really do love the name "Wickednesse" for that font, it just seems so apropos, with it's source being from an old grimoire with that in its title).

Well, I guess I'll have to think about that, and make a decision, but in the meantime, do you have any thoughts on my other question, re my pseudo-smallcaps font, that look somewhat like uncials? Rather than calling that font "small caps" or "petite caps" -- which, technically, it's neither -- as I mentioned earlier it did come out looking somewhat like uncials, so I was thinking that I could call it that, "Alde Uncials." I don't know if that's just as much of a stretch, too, though.

On the other hand, if I was to call it "Alde Smallcaps," would that be truly blasphemous to do, since my lowercase alphabet is actually smaller than my x-height (rather than slightly larger than x-height, as small caps should be)? It would be closer in accuracy to call them "Alde Petite Caps," as far as size goes, but that's technically wrong, too -- hence the uncials idea.

MikeW
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 2:51 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by MikeW » Sat Dec 08, 2018 6:04 pm

Why not add the small caps to the regular font and access them both using the small caps OT feature and as a stylistic set for those applications that cannot use the small caps feature versus as a separate font?

If you like the Wicked... name, naming it Alde Wicked... would keep the font near the other(s) in a font listing.

As for the regular/italic, I would still style link them. Regular/Italic are simply used so often together people will expect it.

BTW, I do like your fonts.

Psymon
Posts: 361
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Psymon » Sat Dec 08, 2018 6:23 pm

MikeW wrote:
Sat Dec 08, 2018 6:04 pm
Why not add the small caps to the regular font and access them both using the small caps OT feature and as a stylistic set for those applications that cannot use the small caps feature versus as a separate font?
Well, because as I've said here repeatedly now, they're technically not "small caps," they're not even "petite caps" -- it's a misnomer to call them that, and even more so for me to include them as either of those within my regular font. I had them in there at first, actually, and then pulled them out and made a separate font out of them for that reason.
If you like the Wicked... name, naming it Alde Wicked... would keep the font near the other(s) in a font listing.
I thought of that, too. Still thinking about what to do about that one. I so wish that I could just group the whole shebang together, all under "Alde." Looking at that link that Erwin gave earlier, I can see that I could easily fit my pseudo-smallcaps font in with the reg./ital., but the blackletter is just TOO different -- and yet, it's actually meant to be used, hand-in-hand, with the other fonts.
As for the regular/italic, I would still style link them. Regular/Italic are simply used so often together people will expect it.
Yeah, that does make sense to me -- it's just a shame that I can't lump all four of my fonts together. :(
BTW, I do like your fonts.
Awesome -- thank you! That makes two of us, at least. LOL :mrgreen:

Psymon
Posts: 361
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Psymon » Sat Dec 08, 2018 9:07 pm

Oh, my thought of calling those small(er) caps "Alde Uncials" wouldn't really work -- in a way they do look somewhat like uncials, but I hadn't really researched those until just now, and very quickly discovered that those have much more rounded letterforms.

Now I'm trying to come up with another name for that one -- I don't want to use "small-" or "petite-caps" because technically that's not what this font is, but checking the thesaurus for "small," I was reminded of the word "paltry."

And that actually has a slight connection -- a near-homophonic one -- to that 16th-century printer, John Alde (whose types I based my fonts on). His print shop was located "at the longe shop, next to S. Mildreds church in the Pultrye." Here's the title page and colophon from the little book that got me started on all this many, many years ago, where it states that...

Alde's Pultrye.jpg
Alde's Pultrye.jpg (496.8 KiB) Viewed 2609 times

This print shop existed for about 3/4 of a century and was essentially a family-run business. The "Pultrye" was a "poultry," that is, a poultry market -- so this print shop was right next to (in fact, it was attached to) St. Mildred's church, which was located in the big poultry market of London.

And so it occurred to me that maybe I could have a little fun with my pseudo-smallcaps font, giving it a somewhat Elizabethan English sounding name, and call it "Alde Paltrye Cappes" (with the latter being the Middle English spelling for "caps").

AND NOT ONLY THAT! Ha! If I don't group my fonts together at all in the same family, then I could also get funky with the names for the regular and italic fonts, too, calling those "Alde Romane" and "Alde Italick" (as I did for fun in the font samples I included in my initial post here). If I group them together in a family, then I'd be stuck with the "modern" name for those variants (i.e. "regular" and "italic").

And then for my blackletter font, that could be "Alde Blacke Wickednesse" (Shakespeare himself, in the First Folio, used "blacke" more often than "black")

Or, hey! Still in keeping with title of the book this all started from, I could call it "Alde Blacke Magick"! Ha ha... Ye Alde Blacke Magick, just like the old song. :D

Holy crap, I think I'm onto something here! I didn't think of that last one until I got to writing this reply.

Hee hee... do you guys think I'm loony? This is actually growing on me, the more I think about it (including the idea/reason to not group them together as a family). :lol:

(EDIT: Yes, I am fully aware that my "Ye" in "Ye Alde Blacke Magick" should be "Þe," but I was being lazy and trying not to confuse anyone... too much.) ;)

Psymon
Posts: 361
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Psymon » Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:52 am

Okay, going back to Erwin's comment at the beginning of this thread here...
Erwin Denissen wrote:
Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:44 pm
Here is a tutorial that explains how to make fonts work like a family:
Font Family Settings
...and in reference to the light bulb that went off in my head with my last reply, I just want to be sure that I'm going to be doing this right -- assuming that my idea (from my last reply) was indeed a reasonable one to begin with, of course. If it wasn't, well, then perhaps the rest of this current reply here is total waste of time. ;)

Anyway, so now I'm thinking of having four separate fonts, NOT grouped together as a family -- i.e. so none of them will be grouped together in one's software, not even just the reg./ital.

Thus, as per my last post, I would have...

- Alde Romane;
- Alde Italick;
- Alde Paltrye Cappes; and
- Alde Blacke Magick.

Now, as far as filling in the various fields in the Font Properties goes, in the first "Identification" tab, I would use those 4 names in the "Font Family" field -- correct? Duh. ;)

And then in the subfamily, for each of those fonts I would think it would be correct to specify them thusly...

- Alde Romane (Regular)
- Alde Italick (Italic)
- Alde Paltrye Cappes (Regular)
- Alde Blacke Magick (Bold)

The first three make obvious sense, of course -- re the last one being bold, well, I don't have a "regular" (thinner) version of that font, of course, but it certainly looks bold, and that's also how it was often used, too, with many texts from the Renaissance era often using a roman (and/or italic) font as their "base font," but with blackletter interspersed here and there wherever a proper name was used, or for emphasis, etc.

Would that seem to be a reasonable way of setting up that first tab in the Font Properties dialog?

I'm not sure what to put for the weight, though -- at least for the blackletter. Thus far, I've had that one just set at "400 - Normal (Regular)" and the "Bold" checkbox NOT checked, for all I know that could be totally wrong (especially if I'm going to give it a subfamily of "bold").

So sorry, I can imagine I must be making this all rather convoluted, but if only to make it worse...

Then, as per that link you pointed out, in the Extended Font Properties (second tab), there's a whole pile of fields there that I'm not sure what to put.

If I did still want to group my 4 fonts together somehow, could I just put "Alde" in that first field, "Typographic Family"?

For the second field, I guess that would be easy for my regular and italic (or "regular italic") fonts, but looking at the help files, and also at the website/PDF for the WWS Family stuff, it seems that the only "subfamily" specifications have to do with the weight of each font, not with the style -- like smallcaps, or blackletter. Even re weight, I suppose my first three fonts would be "regular," but I have no idea how "bold" or "heavy" or "black" or "extra black" or whatever my blackletter would be.

And everything else on that Extended Font Properties tab I also basically have no idea what to put. :shock:

Is there any way to group my four fonts together, if I name them all completely differently (as above)? Can I just fill in that first field on the "Extended" tab, giving them "Alde" as their Typographic Family, and just leave the rest of that whole tab blank?

Indeed, does that even serve any practical purpose, for the end user (or their software)?

I do sincerely hope these aren't dumb questions (or that I'm dumb for wanting to do things the way I want to, re naming my fonts like that). :oops:

MikeW
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 2:51 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by MikeW » Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:50 pm

Psymon wrote:
Sat Dec 08, 2018 6:23 pm
...it's just a shame that I can't lump all four of my fonts together.
It can be done. Though I wouldn't do the blackletter in the style grouping myself. But that's just me, perhaps.

Psymon
Posts: 361
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Psymon » Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:57 pm

MikeW wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:50 pm
Psymon wrote:
Sat Dec 08, 2018 6:23 pm
...it's just a shame that I can't lump all four of my fonts together.
It can be done. Though I wouldn't do the blackletter in the style grouping myself. But that's just me, perhaps.
Well, I did figure that the smallcaps could -- like, I have Adobe Caslon, which has half a zillion variant fonts in there, including smallcaps, alts, and who knows whatever else, but they all relate back to the regular, of course.

But the problem with my "smallcaps" is that they're not really smallcaps, they're not even petite caps -- my lowercase are even smaller than that, so I don't think it would be right to mislead anyone into thinking that's what they're getting.

And in the end, I did kind like the way that leaving all 4 fonts ungrouped gave me the freedom to get funky with the names, too -- and they all start with "Alde," of course, and would still be grouped together that way. :)

I guess I just don't know what to do about the naming in the Font Properties -- or maybe I'm overthinking that, and shouldn't even be worried about it so much, just leave stuff blank (in the Extended tab, anyway). I just don't know how important or critical that info is -- or if it actually even does anything (for most users and/or their software). :roll:

MikeW
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 2:51 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by MikeW » Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:33 pm

One needs to use the Extended tab and also use the naming fields properly on the Naming tab. A few applications will disregard those naming fields as regards keeping the fonts as a separate listing.

So for your:

- Alde Romane;
- Alde Italick;
- Alde Paltrye Cappes; and
- Alde Blacke Magick.

I would use those names in the Naming Tab for each font as the family. So:

AldeRomane
AldeItalick
AldePaltryeCappes
AldeBlackeMagick

Alde Roman would be the Regular weight in the Naming tab.
Alde Italick would be set as the Italic version.

The caps & black... I would list also as a Regular

Then on the Extended tab in the Typographical field, I would only have Alde for all of them.

In the Typographical Family field on the Extended tab, that's where to put the following for their respective fonts:

Romane
Italick
Paltrye Cappes
Blacke Magick

That should do it. Older versions of Word may separate them in the font listing, any decent application shouldn't.

Psymon
Posts: 361
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: Naming (and font properties) for a font family

Post by Psymon » Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:00 pm

Oh, that's interesting, not what I thought (or understood -- obviously).

Re this part...
MikeW wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 4:33 pm
I would use those names in the Naming Tab for each font as the family. So:

AldeRomane
AldeItalick
AldePaltryeCappes
AldeBlackeMagick
Oh, wow, really? Are they supposed to be scrunched together like that, without spaces? You got me curious, so I just opened up Times New Roman off my system, and it's written out in full in that field, as "Times New Roman" with the spaces.
The caps & black... I would list also as a Regular
Re naming the black as a bold, I thought perhaps that might have some advantage somewhere/somehow -- no?

And what about the weight of the blackletter? The other three are just "regular," I guess, but that one is SO thick and heavy in comparison -- but then, there are no other weights for it, of course, so in that regard I suppose it is the "regular" version of it.

Also in the Extended Font Properties tab, there's' those two WWS fields -- as I mentioned earlier, I checked out the website (and related PDF) about that, but pffft, it's all rather over my head, and didn't seem to offer a lot of insight (unless one knows more than me, anyway).

Does that WWS stuff matter for anything?

And then there's a "PostScript CID Findfont Name" field.

And then a "Compatible Full (Macintosh only)" field -- I'm on PC, but I'm assuming that has to do with the end user, not the creator.

And then "Sample text" -- as in "Þe quick brown foxx iumps ouer þe layzie dogge"? Ha ha, I'd definitely put that in, if that's apropos. :lol:

Post Reply