Problems with new font Archivo Narrow

Primary tabs

27 posts / 0 new
Last post
Muj's picture
Muj
Offline
Joined: 7 Jul 2005 - 10:08am
Problems with new font Archivo Narrow
0

I've just downloaded Archivo Narrow from Omnibus-Type from Google webfonts.

http://www.google.com/webfonts#UsePlace:use/Collection:Archivo+Narrow

It seems to work ok in TextEdit and Word but in Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop only random glyphs appear.

What can be the reason, has anyone else had this Problem?

I was hoping to use it in a layout and it's the closest to Univers Narrow I can find.

Riccardo Sartori's picture
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 - 4:20am
0

Your best chance is asking the authors themselves: http://www.omnibus-type.com/

Karl Stange's picture
Offline
Joined: 17 Sep 2009 - 10:07am
0

Which versions of Photoshop and Illustrator are you using?

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Maybe buy Univers Narrow eh?

hhp

Muj's picture
Muj
Offline
Joined: 7 Jul 2005 - 10:08am
0

Eh, No budget for Univers Narrow.

Using CS4.

Karl Stange's picture
Offline
Joined: 17 Sep 2009 - 10:07am
0

Using CS4

I have just moved to CS6 and so I do not know how representative it will be. The fonts show up in the font menu but separated, the bold, bold italic and regular weights/styles appearing under "Archivo Narrow" and the italic appearing separately as "ArchivoNarrow-Italic".

Looking at the font files this appears to be the result of the naming conventions for the OT Family Name (TTX: nameID="16") field, which varies as follows for the four weights/styles:

Regular = Archivo Narrow
Italic = Archivo Narrow Italic
Bold = Archivo Narrow
Bold Italic = (none)

It should be a simple matter of updating the naming metadata to fix the above and have them all appear together in the font menu but if you are experiencing an issue with missing characters I can replicate the problem or see what might be causing it.

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

How much do you spend on your cellphone bill? (Monthly...)

hhp

Dave Crossland's picture
Offline
Joined: 14 Feb 2007 - 1:47pm
0

I've asked the designers to take a look. Thanks! :)

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Hopefully they'll fix it quickly (and hopefully other problems won't pop up). In the meantime: individual weights of Univers are as low as $26. Since it's much less likely to cause technical headaches than a freebie it wouldn't be a waste. Unlike the lion's share of your cellphone bill, or your next dinner out.

Let's not confuse frugality (which I'm a huge fan of) with opportunistic penny-pinching.

hhp

pablo cosgaya's picture
Offline
Joined: 30 Jan 2003 - 6:35am
0

Hi, Spirelli!
Please write us to omnibus.type@gmail.com
We will answer all your questions.
Greetings :-)

Pablo Cosgaya
Omnibus-Type Team

Dave Crossland's picture
Offline
Joined: 14 Feb 2007 - 1:47pm
0

Could you post a screenshot or even a screencast video to youtube?

Muj's picture
Muj
Offline
Joined: 7 Jul 2005 - 10:08am
0

Hey Mr. Papazian (hrant), STOP berating me!!! Do you really think you know anything about my phone bill and eating habits? As you're asking (although I'm unsure how relevant this information really is), my monthly mobile phone bill is roughly GBP 6 (£5 subscription + about £1 for any non-inlusive calls), so you could say just under USD 10.

If it was possible I'd give you the client's details, for you to take up the issue of what font to use on their website with them directly. They've asked for something 'similar' to Univers Condensed Bold and don't want to pay for any extras, and that's it.

Your rants don't contribute much to the issue. Are you on sales commission or frustrated by low sales at the Microfoundry? The designers might be even grateful to have issues pointed out –– maybe?

I've just sent an email with a screen shot and further details to omnibustype@gmail.com. Is this enough, or should I get something to you also, abattis?

Muj's picture
Muj
Offline
Joined: 7 Jul 2005 - 10:08am
0

HI Karl, Here's Illustrator's Glyph window. Although all the glyphs seem to be present, they're all in the wrong order, resulting in just the wrong characters coming up as you type.

Same happens in Photoshop, but not InDesign (all CS4).

Karl Stange's picture
Offline
Joined: 17 Sep 2009 - 10:07am
0

I get the same display but typing is fine, the expected characters come out. Perhaps something in the handling that differs between CS4 and CS6?

I could not identify any encoding issues within FontLab and DTL OTMaster only turned up issues relating to the metrics, which should not cause the problem you are encountering. Could you give an example of cause and effect, as in a character you type and the character that is displayed?

Muj's picture
Muj
Offline
Joined: 7 Jul 2005 - 10:08am
0

Wow, thank you for your effort, Karl. Here an example:

Muj's picture
Muj
Offline
Joined: 7 Jul 2005 - 10:08am
0

Glyph window comparison

Karl Stange's picture
Offline
Joined: 17 Sep 2009 - 10:07am
0

Just to confirm, did you obtain the fonts through the Google Web Fonts site or from somewhere else?

Muj's picture
Muj
Offline
Joined: 7 Jul 2005 - 10:08am
0

An this seems to be the version info(?): Archivo Narrow Bold: 2012 Archivo Narrow Bold 1.002; ttfautohint (v0.8); ttfautohint (v0.8)

Muj's picture
Muj
Offline
Joined: 7 Jul 2005 - 10:08am
0

Yes, I've got them from GWF on Friday.

Theunis de Jong's picture
Offline
Joined: 22 Apr 2008 - 5:06pm
0

The left screenshot shows Archivo Narrow with its glyphs sorted by Glyph Index, not by Unicode (which ought to have been the only setting for Illustrator).

I find something strange in v1.002, quite possible related, or the immediate cause. The cmap table, determining the mapping between Unicode and font glyphs, seems correct for Platform 0 (Unicode) and Platform 3 (Windows). A snippet:

U+003E = greater U+003F = question U+0040 = at U+0041 = A
U+0042 = B U+0043 = C U+0044 = D U+0045 = E
U+0046 = F U+0047 = G U+0048 = H U+0049 = I

However, for Platform 1 (Macintosh encoding), I see this:

U+0005 = B U+0006 = C U+0007 = D U+0008 = E
U+0009 = F U+000A = G U+000B = H U+000C = I
U+000D = J U+000E = K U+000F = L U+0010 = M

As you can see, totally the wrong Unicodes. Most surprising of this is that Illustrator CS4 prefers a Macintosh encoding, even on a Windows system :^)

This problem cannot be fixed by a font user, it's up to the designer to repair it.

Jens Kutílek's picture
Offline
Joined: 12 Sep 2007 - 7:55am
0

They've asked for something 'similar' to Univers Condensed Bold and don't want to pay for any extras, and that's it.

Let me point out that now it’s you who’s paying for the extras. You might have been better off just buying a license for Univers Condensed Bold Web. Or, to adapt a popular free software quote: ‘Free fonts are only cheaper if your time is worth nothing’.

Muj's picture
Muj
Offline
Joined: 7 Jul 2005 - 10:08am
0

Thanks for pointing, Jens. So what?

1) I'm generally not paying anything out of my own pocket that a client should pay.

2) Asking for some quick advice online (my initial post) can be very valuable and time saving – sometimes, so hence I tried.

3) I don't mind to contribute a little to some community efforts (all my other posts in this thread)

Meanwhile I've done my visuals with Univers which I have on my computer, and will let the client know that the online version will look 'similar'. As you see from the face that I've replied, I'm not pressed for time...

Hrant H Papazian's picture
Joined: 3 May 2000 - 11:00am
0

Muj, your cellphone bill is unusually low (which I'm sure you realize). Good for you!

Your rants don't contribute much to the issue.

I disagree. You might have no idea how much advantage people take of the "font scene" just to save a few bucks. Like on Typophile we get so many requests for a font identification that's clearly meant to help track down a pirated copy... This isn't that kind of site - quite the contrary. Unlike cellphone service and food for example, fonts are easy to be a cheapskate on. BTW, I wouldn't say I'm "frustrated" (especially since I'm not big on the retail market) it's more a matter of defending something I value, which is not a useless endeavor.

And Jens is right: you're effectively paying more now (time is money) to fix a problem you could have avoided by spending a modest amount of money in advance (even if your client refuses to pay for it). Does Omnibus Type appreciate the free testing you're doing for them? Of course. But your client isn't paying for that either!

Your client is quite probably a cheapskate. I certainly appreciate that saying "no" to a client is tricky business. But don't blame people like me for pointing out that you've placed yourself in an unenviable situation.

Asking for some quick advice online (my initial post) can be very valuable

Indeed. But don't stop at listening only to technical advice.

hhp

pablo cosgaya's picture
Offline
Joined: 30 Jan 2003 - 6:35am
0

Theunis: Thanks for your input.
Spirelli: We are working to fix the problem. Once we have the solution, I will notify you.
Thank you all for your time.

Pablo Cosgaya
Omnibus-Type Team

Thomas Phinney's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2002 - 11:00am
0

It takes three months to fix a cmap? Or did they just forget to come back and post here?

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

It takes three months to fix a cmap? Or did they just forget to come back and post here?

AFAIK the font fax fixed a few days after the problem was reported.

Thomas Phinney's picture
Offline
Joined: 3 Sep 2002 - 11:00am
0

Cool.