Comments on: Test: Popular professional fonts as webfont http://www.thebrightlines.com/2010/01/24/test-popular-professional-fonts-as-webfont/ HTML, CSS, Javascript and more Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:34:22 +0200 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: gummisig http://www.thebrightlines.com/2010/01/24/test-popular-professional-fonts-as-webfont/comment-page-1/#comment-59 gummisig Tue, 01 Jun 2010 11:51:38 +0000 http://www.thebrightlines.com/?p=390#comment-59 Thanks for this collection mate it´s a very good resource. I´m considering using Garamond on a very big project I´m working on, but am hesitant as it renders terribly on Windows. Although it´s very beautiful on mac on both Safari and Chrome. The insight into Typekit will be very useful, thanks again Thanks for this collection mate it´s a very good resource. I´m considering using Garamond on a very big project I´m working on, but am hesitant as it renders terribly on Windows. Although it´s very beautiful on mac on both Safari and Chrome.

The insight into Typekit will be very useful, thanks again

]]> By: Wouter Bos http://www.thebrightlines.com/2010/01/24/test-popular-professional-fonts-as-webfont/comment-page-1/#comment-38 Wouter Bos Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:22:52 +0000 http://www.thebrightlines.com/?p=390#comment-38 Hmmm. In my experience Typekit is a bit flaky when it comes to quality. I used it for some time for my blog. I was happy with it until I noticed that the rendering in IE was bad: some characters as 'g' and 'j' were cut off. They appear to have fixed that problem now, but I learned to check fonts on all platforms before using it. But then again: I'm just using the trail account and not all fonts are bad that Typekit offers for that account. Hmmm. In my experience Typekit is a bit flaky when it comes to quality. I used it for some time for my blog. I was happy with it until I noticed that the rendering in IE was bad: some characters as ‘g’ and ‘j’ were cut off. They appear to have fixed that problem now, but I learned to check fonts on all platforms before using it.
But then again: I’m just using the trail account and not all fonts are bad that Typekit offers for that account.

]]> By: Ethan Dunham http://www.thebrightlines.com/2010/01/24/test-popular-professional-fonts-as-webfont/comment-page-1/#comment-37 Ethan Dunham Thu, 11 Mar 2010 01:48:37 +0000 http://www.thebrightlines.com/?p=390#comment-37 Thanks for this article. I would take issue though with Typekit's fonts. They do no hinting themselves and leave it completely up to the designer. If the font is OpenType, they serve OpenType. If it is TrueType, they serve TrueType. This makes a GIANT difference in Windows. I think you'll see that (at least the last time I looked) the popular Skolar font on Typekit looks bad in Windows. Font Squirrel in my not-so-humble opinion does a better overall job of generating fonts since even adding a small bit of hinting improves a font's chances tremendously. Now the flip-side. Typekit hosts some FontFont fonts that are optimized for web use. Hand-hinted fonts like that will definitely look good in Windows. My 2 cents. Thanks for this article. I would take issue though with Typekit’s fonts. They do no hinting themselves and leave it completely up to the designer. If the font is OpenType, they serve OpenType. If it is TrueType, they serve TrueType. This makes a GIANT difference in Windows. I think you’ll see that (at least the last time I looked) the popular Skolar font on Typekit looks bad in Windows. Font Squirrel in my not-so-humble opinion does a better overall job of generating fonts since even adding a small bit of hinting improves a font’s chances tremendously. Now the flip-side. Typekit hosts some FontFont fonts that are optimized for web use. Hand-hinted fonts like that will definitely look good in Windows. My 2 cents.

]]>