On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...> wrote:

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Josh Andler wrote:
> Synthesized font faces... Yes, there is value IMHO.

Can you hear me screaming at you from miles away, or should I try harder? :)

Hahaha... I'm not saying I'm in favor of it from a designer perspective. I'm in favor of users not complaining because they can make it bold in Word. I didn't miss not being able to do faux things automatically in AI, so personally I have no investment in it in Inkscape. It's not hard to skew things or use an offset.

Except my suggestion wasn't about using this kind of approach for faux
oblique/bold. It was about using it for large font families like
http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/adobe/minion/.

Good to know. But if I recall correctly, the original discussion was about doing faux stuff because I can swear italics was part of that discussion too. I could totally be misremembering though.

As for the whole faux faces thing, first of all I'd rather see some
proof that the quality of autogenerated "missing" faces is good
enough. I know that Behdad means well, but I can't recall a single
typeface that wouldn't need tweaking after applying weight/skew
adjustment in FontForge.

It's too easy to gain a reputation of a toy application.

I don't disagree. But let's be honest... we are considered a toy application by a lot of designers for a number of good reasons already. While many things can be worked around, a designer shouldn't be forced to jump through hoops to get something print ready.

Cheers,

Josh