Hello,
I was reading about automated type design (
Link) and looked into AI that could do that (
DeepVecFont and
DeepVecFont-v2). I asked one of the authors of the paper if he would make a Glyphs plugin, and his concern was whether or not people would use it.
Heres the link to a Google Form for more standardized information gathering, but feel free to answer in the comments!
https://forms.gle/sVbnP3ouzvAWjyBr6
Comments
Kerning is a perfect candidate for AI, but is a pretty delicate matter. AI still has to learn a lot about it since sloppy, partial, and unprecise autokerning makes more problems than solutions. It has to be really good in order to be used at all.
Understanding the importance and complexity of this topic, and focusing AI on it might have much more potential than trying to automate the top level of the type design process. That's my five cents
But someone will do it anyway, giving to non-designers the ability to create bespoke font. Wether this will lead to more or less work for actual professionals will, IMPO, depend on the nature of the font. If you prompt the AI to combine a Bastarda Schwabacher with a pixel font, I don't see how a client will not turn to us to finish it. But a pixel font + a grotesk - then still there will be lots of coding issues.
However, being 71 with a government pension and a royalty base of established fonts, my income is relatively secure, so the decision to step out of the tech rat race is easier for me than for those in early or mid career.
This question seems to be about Glyphs but as for FontLab, I'd like a checker tool that can point out problems during development. Currently, I find problems by exporting instances, testing the family relationships in TransType, curve glitches in FontCreator, and instances in FontBakery. But a tool that could find inconsistencies during development would be helpful. I don't need it to fix errors, just find them.
Examples of things things that recently slipped past me:
Is BS for "brother's son", "Bahamas", "Big Smile" or "bullshit"?