I cheat this by putting the entire name in the first window as Font-Italic and nothing in the second one.

Stuart :D

You're not able to see the two fonts only on ATM?
Can you see both fonts on Explorer, for example?
If not, Fontographer probably generated the two
fonts with a same file name.

Stuart, I work with PCs, and don't have to "cheat". ;-)
It works fine to me.

Yes, I can see both fonts in explorer. They don't show up only on ATM.

If I put the entire font names in the first window, the system won't percept them as a family, so I won't be able to use the italic style on my font in DTP programs or anywere else.

> Element:Transform:Shear -12

Many "users" wouldn't notice (at least not consciously), but I assume you realize that mechanical transformations like that produce inferior results. If you look at almost any italic (even ones called oblique that maintain the Roman structures, but especially so-called "true" italics that are totally different than the Roman) you'll see that at the absolute very least there has been some manual post-processing, but very often the whole thing is redrawn. Also, the larger the angle you use, the greater the distortion.

At the very least, call the resultant fonts "Oblique", not "Italic".

hhp

> mechanical transformations like that produce inferior results

I am aware of that. However, I wanted to make those italics in the 'quick and easy' way, as it is the voluntary part of my job. Besides, the font is sans-serif grotesk (like Helvetica, I hope I got the terminology right), so simply shearing it does not do it much harm, and I was told that -12 is the optimal angle for such transformation.

Anyway I'm in trouble, when it comes to discussions like this, as there are like 2-3 font professionals in my country which is not that big itself, and font design is not taught in schools, so I guess forums like these are the only place to learn things.

I will keep in mind the Oblique suggestion, thanks

You should at least "insert points at extremes",
after slanting/skewing your font. IIRC, you can
do it using the Clear Paths command (Ctrl+Shift+C
for PCs).

Anyway, I don't know what is going wrong with
your ATM. I tried generating italic fonts at home
last night and it worked just fine.


>it would show up only one of the two fonts.
>ID changing didn't help.

Which one is showing up? The regular, I suppose.
What do you mean by "ID changing"?
Just some questions to see if we can help you. ;-)

> Which one is showing up? The regular, I suppose.
Yes, the regular.

> What do you mean by "ID changing"?
In the Generate Fonts dialog there's a font ID#, which is generated automatically, I suppose. I've been told that if something doesn't work, ie. the fonts not being generated the right way, altering it manually often helps. (It is lame, I know . Anyway, I should reinstall my Fontographer/ATM and then take another look, I guess.

>Anyway, I should reinstall my Fontographer/ATM
>and then take another look, I guess.

I think this is not very recommendable for a trouble like
yours. Specially for ATM. Besides not being recommendable,
I don't think reinstalling your softwares will solve the problem.

Is the italic font correctly generated? Check out with Windows
default font showing (just double-click your font files on Explorer).

Btw, you don't need ATM to install TT fonts on Windows.
Try installing via Control Panel> Fonts.

> I was told that -12 is the optimal angle for such transformation.

Considering they're obliques that need help
standing out (from a body of Roman), I would
agree that the somewhat steep angle of 12 is
a good choice. (Plus many people don't even
think 12 is steep at all.)

> there are like 2-3 font professionals in my country

May I ask where you are?

hhp