Alegreya and Alegreya SC

Primary tabs

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
Craig Davidson's picture
Offline
Joined: 29 Sep 2008 - 9:41pm
Alegreya and Alegreya SC
0

Hi all,

I'm currently in the process of designing a book cover. I'm intending to use Alegreya and Alegreya SC as the title and blurb faces.

Being cautious of free downloads off Google Web Fonts or Font Squirrel, I always try to go an obtain my copies of 'free' fonts from the foundries themselves (to confirm they actually are free and haven't been been pirated on the free sites).

I've found that Alegreya and Alegreya SC can't actually be downloaded from http://www.huertatipografica.com.ar/tipografias/alegreya/ejemplos.html.

Has anyone else had experience with these fonts, and can confirm that the licence does permit commercial use without any payments?

Many thanks.

HVB's picture
HVB
Offline
Joined: 17 Feb 2006 - 9:43am
0

This indicates that the free font family alegreya is covered by the terms of the SIL Open Font License

http://www.fontsquirrel.com/license/alegreya

The SIL License terms can be read in detail here:

http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsi&id=OFL

The font family can also be obtained from Google Web Fonts.

- Herb

Pablo Impallari's picture
Offline
Joined: 1 Feb 2010 - 1:12am
0

> can confirm that the licence does permit commercial use
> without any payments?
Yep, they are 'LIBRE' fonts, and the license allows commercial use.

All the fonts in Google Webfonts can be used for commercial projects.
No Restrictions!

Donation to the designers is always a good idea, although not a requirement.

Charles Ellertson's picture
Joined: 3 Nov 2004 - 11:00am
0

I think we may have something here. To my eye, and for text, the lowercase roman a, f, g, and r need a lot of work. The m, n, v and y need some width-sizing work. But that's what libre fonts are for...

Anyone see anything else in the lowercase roman alphabet? The lowercase italic is a little spiky, but I think that's a current fashion. An alternate "g" would be useful.

Reynir Heiðberg Stefánsson's picture
Joined: 19 Nov 2010 - 11:15am
0

@charles_e – You have the right to modify Alegreya to your heart's content. Use it.

mjkerpan's picture
Offline
Joined: 2 Nov 2007 - 6:04pm
0

Wow. It seems that another Argentine beauty has emerged from Google Webfonts. I do wonder why the small caps were implemented as a separate font rather than as an OpenType feature, though. Does WebKit (and thus Chrome and Android) lack OT feature support still?

Charles Ellertson's picture
Joined: 3 Nov 2004 - 11:00am
0

Downloaded it from Font Squirrel today. No kerning, sigh. Adds a fair bit of time getting it ready for print use.

And yes, I believe Chrome does lack OT support.

Pablo Impallari's picture
Offline
Joined: 1 Feb 2010 - 1:12am
0

@charles_e
The source files are available at http://code.google.com/p/googlefontdirectory/
Those also include OT features like 'liga', 'sups', 'lnum, etc..

Small Caps are separate files, other way most browser will generate fake small caps.

Reynir Heiðberg Stefánsson's picture
Joined: 19 Nov 2010 - 11:15am
0

@mjkerpan – To amplify a bit on Pablo's comment: Browsers will all too often fake small caps even if there are real ones in the font. Having a separate small-caps font helps getting around that. You could have a class .smcp { font-variant: small-caps; } and later change it to .smcp { font-family: "Alegreya SC"; }.

If y'all think it's crazy, take a look at Almendra. Almendra SC is both Swash Caps and Small Caps. Stir Crazy?

Nick Shinn's picture
Offline
Joined: 8 Jul 2003 - 11:00am
0

The professional layout apps rationalize their faux-ing capabilities on the grounds that not all typefaces have the true features that users demand.

To this day, Adobe’s InDesign does not tell users which styles of Adobe Caslon, for instance, are being rendered in true small caps, and which in faux. (The only way to tell is to check whether “All Small Caps” is avaiable in the OT menu.)

Thankfully, InD and Quark no longer offer users faux italic and bold buttons.

I would say, if you respect the user, don’t give them faux if the real thing is not available, let them know—don’t pull the wool over their eyes and give them second best because they don’t know any better. Is that any way to treat your customers? Furthermore, faux-ing provides a disservice to the fonts being fauxed with, because it presents them in a less than ideal light. Is that any way to treat a third party’s products? And finally, fauxing is a ball and chain which hampers the progress of typography.