In fact, over the years I often found myself using Fontographer to do work that most people would do in Adobe Illustrator. I simply liked Fontographer's drawing methods better than Illustrator. It seems to be so much more intuitive.

Perhaps you find Fontographer's tools more inutitive because you've been using them for so long. I find FOG's scaling and rotation tools utterly incomprehensible but, then again, I've been using CorelDraw since 1990, so maybe it's just me...

FOG is definitely not without it's downfalls. Since I haven't used Corel Draw, I don't know the distinctions, but I do prefer how Illustrator works better with regard to those two features.

Yes, there is a lot to be said for familiarity. You're right about the rotation and scaling in Fontographer (FOG). However, I find that the way Fontographer works with Bezier paths and nodes is IMHO superior to Ilustrator (and FontLab) and worth the trade off.

There are features in both FOG and FL that I really like. I would love to be able to combine features I like about FontLab with features I don't in Fontographer (or vise versa).

However, I find that the way Fontographer works with Bezier paths and nodes is IMHO superior to Ilustrator (and FontLab) and worth the trade off.

It really doesn’t take much to be superior to the way Illustrator handles paths, nodes, and handles.

It really doesn’t take much to be superior to the way Illustrator handles paths, nodes, and handles.

I have to laugh at that... you're right. I never used Freehand way back when, but I wonder if it handled similarly to Fontographer since both programs were originally created by ALTSYS.

They were very similar. Fontographer was created first. Altsys expanded on the bézier drawing tools they created when they did Freehand about a year or so later. I still have the Altsys newsletter somewhere in which they made the announcement for the new drawing program.

I forgot all about those newsletters. I used to get them too. Brings back some long lost memories.

> long lost memories

What about this one ? :)
http://typophile.com/node/1812
this is your font Love-Light, right?

Ahhh, I remember it well. It's what got me started selling my own font creations. I have hundreds of fonts that I've created over the years, but only a few dozen have made it out of my hands into the public.

The funny thing, it's true, it was not a font at the time, but I got over a dozen emails in about 2 days time asking for the font. So, I created a whole font around it (based on the few of letters in the word LOVE).

http://new.myfonts.com/fonts/typesetit/love-light/

Since I haven't used Corel Draw, I don't know the distinctions

The context menu shows most of the operations you can perform with the single Node Editing Tool. Not shown on the list because only one node was selected: Align (Horizontal, Vertical, Both H&V, Control Points), Scale Segment, Rotate Segment and Extract Subpath...

I guess I messed up... I edited my original remarks and added the video stuff.... now some of these threads won't make sense to new viewers. My apologies.

BELOW is the original POST of this thread:

Adam Twardock mentioned in another thread:

I've checked and Fontographer 5.0 (soon to be released) behaves the same way as the Type 1 spec and the same way as FontLab Studio.

Cool. I know and understand that FontLab is far more popular and powerful a tool than Fontographer, but I'm looking forward to the release and intend to get it.

I've been using FontLab exclusively since I got it about 7 weeks ago. And while I've learned a great deal, and recognize the overall superiority, there are things about how FontLab functions that simply put, are inferior to Fontographer from my point of view. It's probably more a matter of my being used to Fontographer, as I have used it since 1988.

In fact, over the years I often found myself using Fontographer to do work that most people would do in Adobe Illustrator. I simply liked Fontographer's drawing methods better than Illustrator. It seems to be so much more intuitive.

There are definitely things I like about FontLab over Fontographer, but my hope is that Fontographer's upgrade will incorporate some of those features FontLab has with the already good features of Fontographer.

I'm not exactly an expert at this, but in FontLab, you might want to try deleting the excessive nodes one by one (click on every one and hit delete) instead of lassoing them with the mouse and deleting them all at once. AFAIK if you do this FL tries to match the curve, so will keep it smooth. (Might be a prefs issue too.)
Edit: Alternately using the eraser ("2" key) to remove those nodes keeps curves smooth for me.

I would like to believe that it IS a prefs issue and that I am just not as familiar with FONTLAB as I need to be.

...you might want to try deleting the excessive nodes one by one (click on every one and hit delete)
To be honest, that seems like more work than how I did it in the video.

I wonder if there is a "MERGE" function in FontLab that works slightly differently than using "DELETE"? Or is how it behaves something that I can set up differently in Preferences?

I don't know the answer, so I'll post this message, then investigate it.

cheers.

OK, I checked preferences, and there was nothing I could see.

I did try the selection of the node instead of a lasso over the node, and YES, the behavior IS different (and how I prefer it to behave).

I'll have to play a bit more with it, to see how it works when I have many nodes to delete.... if it's time consuming, or easier.

Thanks for the tip, Nina!

You're welcome Rob, I'm glad if I can help. Note that I added the bit about the Eraser tool in my comment above – that should likely be quicker than deleting all nodes one by one.

Come to think of it, have you tried Contour > Transform > Merge Contours?

Fantastic... yep, the eraser tool is what I need to use in the future.

I should have known to blame it on my lack of experience and ignorance rather than on FontLab.

Now that I've been playing with it, I've also modified several tools to have key options so I don't need to use the mouse to select them. This is exactly what I needed...

Thanks again,

RL

Well, I still use RoboFog from LettError. It is a no-nonsence basic tool for glyph production, based on Fontographer 3.5. Only works in Classic, though. I think Christian Schwartz still uses it as well.

I heard Christian Schwartz say at a TDC event that he now uses Superpolator for things he used to use Robofog for. So I'm assuming he has abandoned it for newer software.

Makes sense. Classic is a bit of a hassle to have. But I can see why he still decides not to use FontLab. That is just weird with changing node properties, and not remembering the values.

I still hope that LettError comes out with new RoboFog.

I really do. FontLab Studio sort of works, but honestly, for glyphs and interpolation, it's not like the old programs.

Well, that’s why Erik sells SuperPolator. And Glyphs is coming along nicely as far as drawing goes.

I still prefer a stick, bar of soap and a sponge to do all my glyph drawing. The interface is a bit damp, but you get use to it. At least I have.

Well; I use FontLab Studio for OT production. For glyph design it just is not enough. James, if you want to use soap that is just great, and that does explain the moistness.

>I'll have to play a bit more with it, to see how it works when I have many nodes to delete.... if it's time consuming, or easier.

This is my main bug: there was a way in FOG to select any points and cmmd-m would remove them, (merge).

>I still hope that LettError comes out with new RoboFog.
Or someone! :)

Cheers!

I still hope that LettError comes out with new RoboFog.

Not necessary, you'll be able to use RoboFab.

Removing nodes in FLS is a lot better than it used to be in previous versions of FL, in which removing even a single node would often result in major outline distortions. In FLS there are still plenty of annoyances, though:

Removing nodes individually usually works differently (and better) than removing a bunch of nodes all at once. This means one needs to carefully select and delete nodes in sequence, trying to guess from experience what order will result in the least distortion and extra editing.

Removing a start point results in a straight line, even if the start point had a curve on both sides. This means one needs to redefine the start point to somewhere else on the outline before removing nodes.

Removing a start point results in a straight line, even if the start point had a curve on both sides.

As someone pointed out above, this problem can be avoided by using the Erase Tool instead of the delete key. You can also left-right-click the node, which retains the curve even if it is a start node.

That's Much Better, (but I wish it would erase off-curve points).

Cheers!