#Royal Fonts
2 messages in this thread
Hi Steve
After the Seybold Conference we are back in Switzerland. And the discussion
about the annoncements on Seybold continues in our seminars…
We are a little bit angry about the impacts of the MS-Apple "Royal" fonts and
an eventually different Bauer PDL on high-resolution image setters. But
unfortunatly we don't know very much about the developments of Apple and
Microsoft. So I like to ask you (and all other forum-members) the following
questions:
– Which are the differences between Adobe-(Type-1)-Fonts and Royal-Fonts ?
– Were happens the rasterization of the Royal-Fonts (in the RIP ? in the MAC ?)
– Could an existing Adobe-RIP deal with the new Royal-Fonts ?
– Will there be a conversion between Royal-Fonts and Adobe-Fonts ?
Kind regards… Stephan Jaeggi, Swiss Printers Association
The Apple "Royal" font format uses a somewhat simpler mathematical description
of character shapes (quadratics) than PostScript's Bezier equations. This
requires more control points to produce the sorts of continuously varying
curves that make up real characters, but Apple claims that the simpler
computation of their font format will result in a lessened computational
burden.
When Apple first announced "Royal" (before Microsoft signed on), Adobe promised
to offer the ability to render Royal fonts on PostScript printers–either by
converting Royal fonts to PostScript format or by providing code to rasterize
Royal fonts directly. Nothing has changed in this promise, so far as I know.
Adobe never promised to offer a tool to convert PostScript fonts into Royal
form, nor to offer Royal fonts.
As of the original Apple announcement, the Royal font rasterizing (the entire
page rasterizing, in fact) was to be done in the Macintosh rather than in a
printer's RIP. Presumably if Adobe offers the promised conversion tool it will
be possible to image Royal fonts on an Adobe PostScript printer; it is likely
that an Apple/Microsoft PostScript clone printer (using the Bauer interpreter)
will be able to rasterize Royal fonts directly.
If one is seriously interested in type and in the advantages of PostScript
(flexibility, availability of a variety of output resolutions and formats,
multiple competing vendors, font library size and quality, and many others), I
believe that it will be possible–indeed desirable–to remain within the Adobe
PostScript orbit on Macintosh, DOS, or OS/2 platforms rather than shifting over
to the Royal font format. I think that PostScript will continue to be the best
choice for serious, quality-oriented users.