4 ms·

Nice. This means a true WYSIWYG application should simulate ink flow! Does any existing app have such feature?

by praptak 13y ago

batmansbelt 13y ago
It would depend on what medium you were printing.
dunham 13y ago
Metafont, the scalable font system for TeX, had per-printer definitions to adjust the font's bitmap rendering for a specific printer. This stackexchange answer briefly describes those parameters: http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/120414/what-are-gf-and-pk-font-files#answer-120419
zokier 13y ago
Probably more reasonable approach than true ink-flow simulation would be using separate font (or hinting) for screen and print for the same typeface. Similarly like some typewriter fonts (eg. FF Trixie[1]) would emulate the ink spread from the typewriter, whilst the actual typewriter would have clean-cut shapes. [1] http://trixiefont.com http://trixiefont.com
- a_e_k 13y ago
  TrueType fonts, at least, had the concept of "engine compensation" [0] during hinting. When specifying a relative distance to move points on the glyph outline, the hint program would classify the distance as "white", "black" or "grey" depending on whether it crossed over whitespace, ink, or a mix of the two. The interpreter could then round or tweak the distance slightly depending on the physical characteristics of the output media. [0] https://developer.apple.com/fonts/ttrefman/RM02/Chap2.html#engine_compensation https://developer.apple.com/fonts/ttrefman/RM02/Chap2.html#e...
err4nt 13y ago
inDesign has a variety of previewing modes, including a 'printed' simulation as well. Consider when you're designing for print you aren't limited to CMYK channels, you can have 6 inks (hexachrome), or any number of custom palettes (1 spot colour, 2 spot colours, 3 spot colours, etc) or any combination of a colour process plus additional spot colours. Since you're printing things on all channels it's important to be able to predict (before printing) how different ink layers and transparencies will eventually flatten down on the page. I do most of my work for screen, but inDesign is truly the most advanced software for taking a print piece to press (in PDF format). Even to designers trying to use Adobe Illustrator for print work I STILL steer them toward inDesign because of the print-related extras and better opentype support. FWIW, inDesign is the only Adobe product I'll 'miss' now that I've stopped upgrading. I'm not going to Creative Cloud and I can do all of my work using nonAdobe software EXCEPT for inDesign.
- troymc 13y ago
  It's not optimal, but Adobe does have a single-app plan, so you could get InDesign CC for $20 per month, every month, for the rest of your life… I wonder if you've tried TeX and family. XeTeX has full OpenType support.
  - stan_rogers 13y ago
    Unfortunately, TeX and sons pretty much begins and ends with typesetting; graphical nuance is not its strong suit. It's easy enough to illustrate a text-oriented document, but it's a real bear to create magazine-style or brochure layouts, spreads, gatefolds and so on. For that sort of thing, you really need something that is tied much closer to output than to content in the working space, and TeX is pretty heavily biased the other way around.
    - troymc 13y ago
      I'm told that QuarkXPress was once the leader in page layout for magazines etc. I wonder if it's still a viable alternative. Apparently you can get it for $850.

Nice. This means a true WYSIWYG application should simulate ink flow! Does any existing app have such feature?

by praptak 13y ago

Nice. This means a true WYSIWYG application should simulate ink flow! Does any existing app have such feature?

batmansbelt 13y ago

It would depend on what medium you were printing.

dunham 13y ago

Metafont, the scalable font system for TeX, had per-printer definitions to adjust the font's bitmap rendering for a specific printer. This stackexchange answer briefly describes those parameters: http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/120414/what-are-gf-and-pk-font-files#answer-120419

zokier 13y ago

Probably more reasonable approach than true ink-flow simulation would be using separate font (or hinting) for screen and print for the same typeface. Similarly like some typewriter fonts (eg. FF Trixie[1]) would emulate the ink spread from the typewriter, whilst the actual typewriter would have clean-cut shapes. [1] http://trixiefont.com http://trixiefont.com

a_e_k 13y ago
TrueType fonts, at least, had the concept of "engine compensation" [0] during hinting. When specifying a relative distance to move points on the glyph outline, the hint program would classify the distance as "white", "black" or "grey" depending on whether it crossed over whitespace, ink, or a mix of the two. The interpreter could then round or tweak the distance slightly depending on the physical characteristics of the output media. [0] https://developer.apple.com/fonts/ttrefman/RM02/Chap2.html#engine_compensation https://developer.apple.com/fonts/ttrefman/RM02/Chap2.html#e...

err4nt 13y ago

inDesign has a variety of previewing modes, including a 'printed' simulation as well. Consider when you're designing for print you aren't limited to CMYK channels, you can have 6 inks (hexachrome), or any number of custom palettes (1 spot colour, 2 spot colours, 3 spot colours, etc) or any combination of a colour process plus additional spot colours. Since you're printing things on all channels it's important to be able to predict (before printing) how different ink layers and transparencies will eventually flatten down on the page. I do most of my work for screen, but inDesign is truly the most advanced software for taking a print piece to press (in PDF format). Even to designers trying to use Adobe Illustrator for print work I STILL steer them toward inDesign because of the print-related extras and better opentype support. FWIW, inDesign is the only Adobe product I'll 'miss' now that I've stopped upgrading. I'm not going to Creative Cloud and I can do all of my work using nonAdobe software EXCEPT for inDesign.

troymc 13y ago
It's not optimal, but Adobe does have a single-app plan, so you could get InDesign CC for $20 per month, every month, for the rest of your life… I wonder if you've tried TeX and family. XeTeX has full OpenType support.
- stan_rogers 13y ago
  Unfortunately, TeX and sons pretty much begins and ends with typesetting; graphical nuance is not its strong suit. It's easy enough to illustrate a text-oriented document, but it's a real bear to create magazine-style or brochure layouts, spreads, gatefolds and so on. For that sort of thing, you really need something that is tied much closer to output than to content in the working space, and TeX is pretty heavily biased the other way around.
  - troymc 13y ago
    I'm told that QuarkXPress was once the leader in page layout for magazines etc. I wonder if it's still a viable alternative. Apparently you can get it for $850.