Bebas Neue (Regular) is close - hard to tell from size of sample.

I got "Balboa Light" from MyFonts... Not sure if it is though....

After making a mockup it is Bebas Neue
http://www.dafont.com/bebas-neue.font

Luckily it can't be Bebas Neue* because it has a non-horrid "2".

* Which BTW looks just like another font...

hhp

The horrid 2 is a screen problem in Dafont not in the font.

and if Bebas Neue looks just like another font then that must be the solution
to our font identification - so what is it?

see here for better view of Bebas:
www.dharmatype.com/dharma-type

A rendering problem in Dafont will become a rendering problem many other places. The curves are just too crappy. This is typical of free fonts, and since time is money you end up paying for that.

hhp

Thanks for all the feedback, I'm gonna try and use Bebas Neue, will post results here :)

Actually the curves overall in Bebas are pretty good - when opened in FontLab only thing Font Audit found was this on that curve on the 2.

In the interest of fairness not all free fonts are bad - on the other hand some are really bad. Dafont and other free font sites have examples of both - you need to be careful and try things out just like with some commercial fonts.

That one bad curve makes the font essentially unusable ("2" is not exactly a rare character). And Bebas might have other problems (like in its kerning) that don't show up as quickly, but could end up ruining a project after it's too late to change the font. Then you need a font editor (and the expertise to use it) or you need to pay somebody to fix it. So in the end, not at all free.

Of course not all free fonts are bad. But pretending commercial fonts have a comparable degree of problems is not realistic. You need to be able to trust your tools.

hhp

One bad curve does not make any font unusable. Run a FontAudit on many commercial fonts and it makes suggestions on some curves, not all that are very critical or even really worthy of being marked. That being said, I really do not think anyone would say that commercial fonts have as many problems as free fonts. A commercial foundry would not stay in business very long if they became known for problem fonts. It is said on Typophile often enough that you are safer with professional commercial fonts.

This one is critical. And that's typical of free fonts.

So I would go further and say: most free fonts end up not free.

hhp

Thanks for the input. It seem like the Bebas Neue is a good option, but I'm not sure I'm quite there yet, it seems like its a bit too Bold and not Condensed enough... Is it because I didn't download the right one??

Other than that it's perfect! :)
Thanks

One request: if it ends up biting you in the butt please come back here and report.

hhp

huh?

The "2" in Bebas is defective, and will sometimes come out distorted. Considering the designer doesn't seem to mind, there might be (and probably are) other serious technical issues. Unless you have the software and the skills to fix such problems on-the-spot, you might realize too late that you have to switch fonts. The "perfect" might become "putrid", and publicizing that turn-around would be a useful public service.

hhp

The issue of not being condensed enough can be corrected by adjusting the tracking, like for the phone number, also notice that different tracking was used for the e-mail line as well. And as I said earlier I have played with the font and found no major problems with it.

Note that condensed isn't the same as tight; the former refers to the width of the letter bodies, as opposed to their spacing.

hhp

Here is a grab of how Acrobat Reader 10.1.7 renders the font Ezra in the file texmf/tex/makor2/refcard.pdf of the makor2 TeX package (dated 2003) that I still have in my things.

Interestingly, Fontforge complains about the elements in BlueValues/OtherBlues of Bebas neue. Maybe the distortion on dafont also comes from there.