Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Thomas Phinney

About

Username
Thomas Phinney
Joined
Visits
838
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
492
Invited by
Admin James Puckett
Posts
681
  • Re: Home office vs. office

    400? I remember 300, 1200, 2400, 9600, 14.4K and 28.8K....
  • Re: Final production steps

    Adam Twardoch wrote up an excellent explanation here:
    https://forum.fontlab.com/fontlab-studio-tips-and-tricks/font-family-naming-in-fontlab-studio-5/msg841/#msg841

    Although the process is specific to FontLab Studio 5, the underlying principles are applicable to all font editors.
  • Re: Units per em

    Unless you have a good reason to not use 1000, use 1000, since some software still assumes it.

    The assumption is that fonts with PostScript outlines (Type 1 or OpenType CFF/.otf) will have a 1000-unit em, and fonts with TrueType outlines, a 2048-unit em. What is considered “standard” is dependent on the outline format.
  • Re: Optical correction in Arabic monoline


    Obviously, the individual letters must be important; if one takes a sample of English text, and blurs it so that only the bouma is visible, it becomes unreadable. But it's also true that lower-case reads better than upper-case, despite the latter being more legible, which would seem to indicate bouma is significant.
    Lowercase being more legible than uppercase can also be explained by the letter shapes being, individually, more distinctive. The question has been specifically investigated, btw—the exact way you are asking it above. Came to the conclusion that word shape was not contributing much.

    The question of how much significance is properly allocated to bouma is a complicated and difficult one, and I only have a very limited acquaintance with the facts involved; thus, I felt unprepared to wade into a debate with Hrant over that issue.
    Even that exact question has been specifically investigated: the relative contribution of word shape and letter shapes. I believe it came out about 75% to 25% or something like that.

    For Hrant, my challenge is this: design an experiment that could potentially falsify the primacy of word shape in immersive reading, whose outcome would show quite different results if the contribution of parallel letter recognition was the primary factor in word recognition (as cognitive psychologists doing reading today believe). That is, come up with an experiment that you predict would come out one way, your opponents predict would come out a different way, and if it came out that other way, you would accept that they appeared to be correct.
  • Re: Fontself as an alternative to ScanFont

    Mark, I will see what I can do for you there.