I am a long time Fog / FontLab user but am considering switching to Glyphs as many have recommended it. I looked at Glyphs and the interface is very different from what I am used to. My question is how difficult is it to switch over? Can Glyphs handle FL files or do they have to be converted? And is it worth the time and effort to switch?
George
0
Comments
As an aside FL7 can export native Glyphs files (although I haven't tested that much).
I have seen new Glyphs users opening a new tab for each glyph they want to edit, as if they are still thinking in the old paradigm. It's little disorienting at first, but you quickly find that editing an arbitrary number of glyphs in an integrated editor is a much better way to work. It's much easier to see what you're doing in context with other glyphs.
FL6 and 7 can also work this way, so if you're used to that, it will be an easier transition.
Could you elaborate on being VERY happy to have switched, please? What are the main pros?
I don’t think I have ever made a font that required only a single tool, so I am with Ramiro on this: take advantage of the best features each software offers. Obviously, this means that what is most important is not what individual tools you use but how they exchange data with each other. UFO helps a lot in some cases, and both Glyphs and FL7 having text source formats (FL7 as the optional JSON .vfj format) makes it possible to do tool-external scripting to convert data more specialised tools.
Glyphs manages to balance automation with not oversmarting the designer. Whenever you have an idea of how to improve something about Glyphs, it either can be done a lot easier than you expect or used to in FL, there’s a script for it, or they are going to fix your problem at some point soon-ish. For some other specific things, you can script it yourself (or hire a coder).