Dragging the "optical size" slider to a lower value, I'm horrified to see that the cutoff on the lowercase 'e' is no longer parallel to the direction of the text. This was always my go-to way of differentiating Helvetica from look alikes. Now I have to find a new technique :(
Helvetica Now Variable
91–100 of 197 posts
Re: Helvetica Now Variable
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Typefaces should not be copyrightable. Print ones are not, it makes no sense that digital ones are.
> Fonts should not be copyrightable. Print fonts are not, it makes no sense that digital ones are. I agree with your first statement, except that I'm stuck re-wording it to "I wish fonts weren't copyrightable" because I can't find an argument/proper analogy that works. I don't know the details around copyright law, IANAL (surprise!) either, so I'm looking at this from an incredibly naive legal perspective -- that alm…
To answer your specific question as to why fonts are not copyrightable in the US, 37 C.F.R. § 202.1(e) specifies that a "typeface as typeface" is not copyrightable.
Re: Helvetica Now Variable
#93The extreme values for "Optical Size" really alter the character of the font for me. Changing the angle of the lower arc of the "e" for example really alter how the font feels, and it's unrecognisable to me as Helvetica:
Re: Helvetica Now Variable
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm happy paying people for their effort and creativity. This licensing agreement is not something I would personally consider though: > You get a total number of prepaid pageviews that can be used over time. This means that you will pre-pay for a number of pageviews, then you’ll have to come back to order more after your site has been viewed that number of times. > For example, if you order 250,000 page views, when…
Oh, I'm not defending this license in particular. That's a great point, apologies. Most fonts I see for sale have a one-time license fee for # of views/month. So if you do 500k monthly views you pay ~$99 once, and 5MM views is X*4. That's pretty reasonable to me, the costs are hardly prohibitive. If you're looking for a fantastic variable font, I can recommend Proxima Vara[0], which is the variable iteration of Proxi…
[deleted]
Re: Helvetica Now Variable
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a standard practice for a lot of webfont vendors isn't it? I know it was for Typekit/Adobe Fonts (which requires a Creative Cloud subscription).
What even is Typekit’s pricing these days? I looked into it a few weeks ago and the only thing I could find was Typekit comes with any Creative Cloud subscription, including $10/mo ones. But surely you can’t pay $10/mo to serve an arbitrary amount from their webfont CDN? Did I miss something? Is the pricing only available after you subscribe?
As far as I know, that is the deal.
Re: Helvetica Now Variable
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US, "typefaces", ie. the shapes of the letters, generally are not. "Fonts", ie. the programs that draw the letters, are copyrighted as software, as something of a workaround. For more reading on the history here Typographica has a succinct overview[0]. [0] https://typographica.org/on-typography/copyright-protection-...
Point stands. These ought to not be royalty driven.
I'm not sure I follow. Whether or not the typeface is eligible for copyright, the pricing model and terms of use are at the discretion of the font creator.
Re: Helvetica Now Variable
#97Am I crazy for expecting fonts to be free? There are so many good options that I can use without paying a license fee. I can't imagine liking the tiny differences in a font so much that I would get myself locked into a yearly licensing fee.
I expect some fonts to be free, but I do not expect all fonts to be free. The former is because we have become dependent upon fonts through the use of technology, and having restrictive licenses upon all fonts would inhibit the use of technology. The latter is because I have no desire to dictate the terms that font creators use.
That being said, I don't have high expectations or great needs of fonts since legibility is the most important criteria. Fonts are tools to differentiate the structure of a document. In most cases, the design of a document is less relevant.
Re: Helvetica Now Variable
#98Fantastic font, now infinitely malleable! Unfortunately it is expensive, and you can't just buy it and use it, you have to renew the license annually. https://www.myfonts.com/fonts/mti/helvetica-now-variable?tab... And my use case isn't even covered: include in a web application that will be downloaded and installed by customers. My current choice is OpenSans https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Open+Sans
How does this work? Normally I download and install TTF files and install them on my computer. How are licensed fonts work? Is there some kind of proprietary installation?
If you (the end user) download and install a font on your machine, or buy an OS with it pre-installed, then you (the end user) are paying the licensing for it.
If you (the website operator) link to a font from your CSS file so end users' browsers will download and render text with it, then you (the website operator) are paying the licensing fees.
Re: Helvetica Now Variable
#99It's still disconcerting to me to see that monotype.com after the Helvetica headline. Monotype and Linotype were fierce rivals since their inception in the late 19th century. The cases where a typeface was offered for both Monotype and Linotype hot metal were rare (Times New Roman and Sabon being the most notable cases). It was only in the post-digital era that we saw consolidation where Agfa (at that time wholly owned by Bayer, the aspirin people) bought the company¹ and merged it with their prepress division, Agfa Compugraphic. It was later sold to a private equity firm who 7 years later bought Linotype, at that time owned by German printing company Heidelberg. They've continued their acquisitions since then purchasing FontShop, the largest indie vendor of typefaces, ITC which was founded as a platform-independent supplier of typeface designs and, most recently URW, a newer entry in the type world but largely influential for high-quality designs (alongside some copied designs) and for the creation of Ikarus which was the first outline-based type description system, predating even Metafont.²
1. The late 20th century Monotype was the descendant of the English spin-off of the American parent company. Lanston Monotype did not survive the transition from hot metal typesetting and was never the significant producer of new designs that English Monotype was. Last I heard, the remains of American Monotype (aka Lanston Monotype) were held by a Canadian printer, although that was 20 years ago and he was not a young man so I don't know now).
2. I had previously thought that Metafont was the first outline-based type design system, not realizing Ikarus's priority until recently.
Re: Helvetica Now Variable
#100It's still disconcerting to me to see that monotype.com after the Helvetica headline. Monotype and Linotype were fierce rivals since their inception in the late 19th century. The cases where a typeface was offered for both Monotype and Linotype hot metal were rare (Times New Roman and Sabon being the most notable cases). It was only in the post-digital era that we saw consolidation where Agfa (at that time wholly own…
Ah, so I wasn't imagining it. I know little about font history, but I know that Arial is a Monotype thing, and Arial is a metrically-compatible Helvetica look-alike, so it seemed strange that Helvetica would be under the same brand.