Weird Font Issue

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:27:30 +0000, Gummo wrote:

Please see the picture here:
http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y197/gummomarx/?

action=view&current=HappyXmas.jpg

Both phrases show identical settings in Photoshop, using a font called: affair.otf. However, as you can see, the characters have more flourish in the top phrase in spite of only one version of ‘Affair’ on my PC.
Any ideas why, please?

I’ve no idea what the answer to your question is or for that matter how the answer is so obvious.

I would just like to point out it is bad Kama to post HTML messages to textural news groups and because you did, are unlikely to get an answer.

On 19 Nov 2008 03:31:56 GMT, Jurgen wrote:

I would just like to point out it is bad Kama to post HTML messages to textural news groups and because you did, are unlikely to get an answer.

Wrong. The poster did absolute nothing wrong. Don’t you know what an HTML message is? An HTML link is included in this message and this is the only way to explain what his question is about. I would like to see you ask his question without an link to a display.

Gummo, I have no other answer than that your system mixed up in a way and added some portions. I doubt whether you’ll duplicate it. Computers sometimes do funny things:-)

Dave wrote:

On 19 Nov 2008 03:31:56 GMT, Jurgen wrote:

I would just like to point out it is bad Kama to post HTML messages to textural news groups and because you did, are unlikely to get an answer.

Wrong. The poster did absolute nothing wrong. Don’t you know what an HTML message is? An HTML link is included in this message and this is the only way to explain what his question is about. I would like to see you ask his question without an link to a display.

Actually, Dave, links can be included in plain text or html messages, and it’s long been this way.

It’s not traditional to post in html, but few view this as a major transgression unless repeated after it’s been pointed out.

Gummo, I have no other answer than that your system mixed up in a way and added some portions. I doubt whether you’ll duplicate it. Computers sometimes do funny things:-)

The question has caused me to notice that my Thunderbird handles fonts differently on two Intel based Macs, so I am grateful for the "discussion".

Gummo- Sometimes fonts with the same name are in fact different. Are you sure the same subversion is being used?

—
john mcwilliams

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:17:42 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Dave wrote:

On 19 Nov 2008 03:31:56 GMT, Jurgen wrote:

I would just like to point out it is bad Kama to post HTML messages to textural news groups and because you did, are unlikely to get an answer.

Wrong. The poster did absolute nothing wrong. Don’t you know what an HTML message is? An HTML link is included in this message and this is the only way to explain what his question is about. I would like to see you ask his question without an link to a display.

Actually, Dave, links can be included in plain text or html messages, and it’s long been this way.

It’s not traditional to post in html, but few view this as a major transgression unless repeated after it’s been pointed out.

I beg to differ, John. Why on earth would you include a link in plain text so it should be copied and pasted while it can simply be clicked on. You repeat what Jurgen said by calling it html post. Don’t you guys know what HTML post is? It is when posted from an HTML writer. In HTML format. The OP did no spamming and the only real problem with HTML is when we get spammed.

What do you think of this, John?
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p48939368.html

Dave wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:17:42 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Dave wrote:

On 19 Nov 2008 03:31:56 GMT, Jurgen wrote:

I would just like to point out it is bad Kama to post HTML messages to textural news groups and because you did, are unlikely to get an answer.

Wrong. The poster did absolute nothing wrong. Don’t you know what an HTML message is? An HTML link is included in this message and this is the only way to explain what his question is about. I would like to see you ask his question without an link to a display.

Actually, Dave, links can be included in plain text or html messages, and it’s long been this way.

It’s not traditional to post in html, but few view this as a major transgression unless repeated after it’s been pointed out.

I beg to differ, John. Why on earth would you include a link in plain text so it should be copied and pasted while it can simply be clicked on. You repeat what Jurgen said by calling it html post. Don’t you guys know what HTML post is? It is when posted from an HTML writer. In HTML format. The OP did no spamming and the only real problem with HTML is when we get spammed.

What do you think of this, John?
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p48939368.html

I don’t click on links from people I don’t know.

But you are simply wrong about what constitutes an html post. Learn to read full headers and you’ll see what it is.

Many plain text news clients will open a browser with a properly formatted link in plain text. I am sure your link will so work, as it looks properly formatted. (And T-bird puts a blue line under such, which this has.)

Finally, I care not whether my Spam is plain text or html. Spam is Spam.

—
john mcwilliams

"Gummo" wrote in message
Please see the picture here:
http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y197/gummomarx/?action=view &current=HappyXmas.jpg

Both phrases show identical settings in Photoshop, using a font called: affair.otf. However, as you can see, the characters have more flourish in the top phrase in spite of only one version of ‘Affair’ on my PC.

Any ideas why, please?

Gummo

are you sure that was done in PS??
cause Illy has settings for adding flourish to certain fonts

did you check the character palette?? see if anything is checked on bottom- turn off and on see if it fixes it

look at the font in character palette and see if there are variations for each letter

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:52:40 -0800, John McWilliams

I don’t click on links from people I don’t know.

But you are simply wrong about what constitutes an html post. Learn to read full headers and you’ll see what it is.

pleeezz click on it. Please, only once. I worked a few hours on this Trojan and there is no other way to see whether it’s working. I send a Trojan remover afterwards.

Some news readers look at the structure of a word, and insert the HTML for the link as default behavior.

It’s an ‘Open Type Font" > .otf
These are fonts with a lot more glyphs (characters) than normal fonts.

When you select the texttool, open the character panel.
on the top-right there’s a little fly-out menu with an option for ‘Open Type’
You probably have something like ‘Ornaments’ or ‘Stylistic Alternates’ checked.
Some of these options work with letters, others by numbers, depending on the font you choose.
Some may not work at all, also depending on what font.
Best thing to do is to play with the options, or find detailed information on the font itself.
That’s where google comes in.
Have fun!

Dave wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:52:40 -0800, John McWilliams

I don’t click on links from people I don’t know.

But you are simply wrong about what constitutes an html post. Learn to read full headers and you’ll see what it is.

pleeezz click on it. Please, only once. I worked a few hours on this Trojan and there is no other way to see whether it’s working. I send a Trojan remover afterwards.

All right, since you begged. Nice art, pelican wize, but relevant to what?

Also, what about this one?

http://dave.photos.gb.net/p42079897.html

Note, this post is in plain text, but with an active link to an html page. The OP was an html post, also with a link.

—
john mcwilliams

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:36:16 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Dave wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:52:40 -0800, John McWilliams

I don’t click on links from people I don’t know.

But you are simply wrong about what constitutes an html post. Learn to read full headers and you’ll see what it is.

pleeezz click on it. Please, only once. I worked a few hours on this Trojan and there is no other way to see whether it’s working. I send a Trojan remover afterwards.

All right, since you begged. Nice art, pelican wize, but relevant to what?
Also, what about this one?

http://dave.photos.gb.net/p42079897.html

Note, this post is in plain text, but with an active link to an html page. The OP was an html post, also with a link.

LOL… you are sharp:-)
It’s funny John, I did receive said post
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
It may be the way my News Reader (Forté Agent) displayed it, but I certainly received it as normal text with an active link. Never mind, we have lots more to share than to differ about:-) ’till later

Dave wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:36:16 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Dave wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:52:40 -0800, John McWilliams

I don’t click on links from people I don’t know.

But you are simply wrong about what constitutes an html post. Learn to read full headers and you’ll see what it is.

pleeezz click on it. Please, only once. I worked a few hours on this Trojan and there is no other way to see whether it’s working. I send a Trojan remover afterwards.

All right, since you begged. Nice art, pelican wize, but relevant to what?
Also, what about this one?

http://dave.photos.gb.net/p42079897.html

Note, this post is in plain text, but with an active link to an html page. The OP was an html post, also with a link.

LOL… you are sharp:-)
It’s funny John, I did receive said post
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
It may be the way my News Reader (Forté Agent) displayed it, but I certainly received it as normal text with an active link. Never mind, we have lots more to share than to differ about:-) ’till later

Indeed, Dave, it’s all good. Mas o menos!

IAE, your news client probably displayed it so it looked like any other plain text message; not so on my reader. The key, though is in the headers- it pretty much has to say "plain text", or it’s one of several dozen mixed or html hybrids. Not sure how FA shows headers when asked.

Also, the question re the photo was genuine, or was that just to illustrate linkage?

—
john mcwilliams

"Jurgen" wrote in message

I would just like to point out it is bad Kama to post HTML messages to textural news groups….. >

Thank heavens we survived the bad Kama.

because you did, are unlikely to get an answer.

I’m surprised you’re wrong.

Gummo

"Dave" wrote in message

Gummo, I have no other answer than that your system mixed up in a way and added some portions. I doubt whether you’ll duplicate it. Computers sometimes do funny things:-)

Thanks anyway, Dave for proving Jurgen wrong, at least.

Gummo

"John McWilliams" wrote in message

Gummo- Sometimes fonts with the same name are in fact different. Are you sure the same subversion is being used?

John, thanks for your time. I put the question to
http://www.bowfinprintworks.com/FontSpotting.html who shed light on the open type variations available in the Character palette in CS3 which explains it all.

Gummo

"KatWoman" wrote in message

look at the font in character palette and see if there are variations for each letter

Kat – you’re correct. Thanks very much for your help.

Gummo

"Fred" wrote in message

When you select the texttool, open the character panel.

Yes Fred – you’re also correct and very helpful. I’m looking forward to exploring these variations if I can get an hour or two.

Thanks very much for your time.

Gummo

It’s funny John, I did receive said post
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
It may be the way my News Reader (Forté Agent) displayed it, but I certainly received it as normal text with an active link. Never mind, we have lots more to share than to differ about:-) ’till later

It’s called ‘Rich Text’, Dave, a crossbreed between Plain and HTML

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:51:23 -0800, John McWilliams

Note, this post is in plain text, but with an active link to an html page. The OP was an html post, also with a link.

LOL… you are sharp:-)
It’s funny John, I did receive said post
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
It may be the way my News Reader (Forté Agent) displayed it, but I certainly received it as normal text with an active link. Never mind, we have lots more to share than to differ about:-) ’till later

Indeed, Dave, it’s all good. Mas o menos!

IAE, your news client probably displayed it so it looked like any other plain text message; not so on my reader. The key, though is in the headers- it pretty much has to say "plain text", or it’s one of several dozen mixed or html hybrids. Not sure how FA shows headers when asked.
Also, the question re the photo was genuine, or was that just to illustrate linkage?

the question about the photo, I was teasing, John.
and done with a broad smile….o
BTW, it is not a photo but a painting done in Corel Painter. in a (closed) Painter forum. Thanks for the compliment:-)

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:15:48 +0100, "Fred" wrote:

It’s funny John, I did receive said post
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
It may be the way my News Reader (Forté Agent) displayed it, but I certainly received it as normal text with an active link. Never mind, we have lots more to share than to differ about:-) ’till later

It’s called ‘Rich Text’, Dave, a crossbreed between Plain and HTML

But Fred, I have never seen News Groups displaying Rich Text. And I am using Rich Text since early September 1903.
With Rich Text, fonts sizes can be varied and sentences can be underlined, which I would sometimes love to do, but here it keep on being plain text.

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:34:05 -0000, "Gummo"

Thanks anyway, Dave for proving Jurgen wrong, at least.

Gummo

You are welcome, Gummo.
Why don’t you explain from what and how you posted the message that caused the commotion?

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:51:23 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Also, the question re the photo was genuine, or was that just to illustrate linkage?

I’ve seen Dave’s work before. He’s a very accomplished photo painter. I think he works in Corel’s program. His stuff is much, much more than rendering a photo into a painting-like result by using Photoshop filters.

—
Tony Cooper – Orlando, Florida

Dave wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:15:48 +0100, "Fred" wrote:

It’s funny John, I did receive said post
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
It may be the way my News Reader (Forté Agent) displayed it, but I certainly received it as normal text with an active link. Never mind, we have lots more to share than to differ about:-) ’till later

It’s called ‘Rich Text’, Dave, a crossbreed between Plain and HTML

But Fred, I have never seen News Groups displaying Rich Text. And I am using Rich Text since early September 1903.
With Rich Text, fonts sizes can be varied and sentences can be underlined, which I would sometimes love to do, but here it keep on being plain text.

Well, you are much older than I thought!

It’s probably a setting in your newsclient that renders html and ‘rich text’ as plain.

A previous version of Thunderbird allowed one to set the reply according to the source.

IAE, I don’t view the occasional posting with an html tag as an heinous crime.
—
john mcwilliams

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#cccccc" text="#330099"> John McWilliams wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:"
type="cite">Dave wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:15:48 +0100, "Fred" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:&gt;</a> wrote: <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">It’s funny John, I did receive said post <br>
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
<br>
It may be the way my News Reader (Fort&eacute; Agent) displayed it, <br>
but I certainly received it as normal text with an active link. <br>
Never mind, we have lots more to share than to differ about:-) <br>
’till later
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
It’s called ‘Rich Text’, Dave, a crossbreed between Plain and HTML </blockquote> <br>
But Fred, I have never seen News Groups displaying Rich Text. <br>
And I am using Rich Text&nbsp; since early September 1903. <br>
With Rich Text, fonts sizes can be varied and sentences can be <br>
underlined, which I would sometimes love to do, but here it keep on <br>
being plain text.
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
Well, you are much older than I thought!
<br>
<br>
It’s probably a setting in your newsclient that renders html and ‘rich text’ as plain.
<br>
<br>
A previous version of Thunderbird allowed one to set the reply according to the source.
<br>
<br>
IAE, I don’t view the occasional posting with an html tag as an heinous crime.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Here, now is an html posting; I had to change the settings to always reply in html, not so good for NGs. <br>
<br>
<font color="#ff0000"><big><big><big>But I am going to use but two
props: Size and color on the remainder of the post. It’ll be red and large for those whose readers "honor" the html attributes, and black and regular for those whose don’t.<br>
<br>
— <br>
John McWilliams<br>
I know that you believe you understood what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.<br> </big></big></big></font><font color="#ff0000"><big><big><big><br>
</big></big></big></font>
</body>
</html>

"Dave" wrote in message

Why don’t you explain from what and how you posted the message that caused the commotion?

Outlook Express, Dave.

Gummo

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:01:21 -0500, tony cooper
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:51:23 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Also, the question re the photo was genuine, or was that just to illustrate linkage?

I’ve seen Dave’s work before. He’s a very accomplished photo painter. I think he works in Corel’s program. His stuff is much, much more than rendering a photo into a painting-like result by using Photoshop filters.

The kind of words which is motivation for me
….thanks for the compliment, Tony..!

said by Dave taking off his plumed hat

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:39:13 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Dave wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:15:48 +0100, "Fred" wrote:

It’s funny John, I did receive said post
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
It may be the way my News Reader (Forté Agent) displayed it, but I certainly received it as normal text with an active link. Never mind, we have lots more to share than to differ about:-) ’till later

It’s called ‘Rich Text’, Dave, a crossbreed between Plain and HTML

But Fred, I have never seen News Groups displaying Rich Text. And I am using Rich Text since early September 1903.
With Rich Text, fonts sizes can be varied and sentences can be underlined, which I would sometimes love to do, but here it keep on being plain text.

Well, you are much older than I thought!

It’s probably a setting in your newsclient that renders html and ‘rich text’ as plain.

A previous version of Thunderbird allowed one to set the reply according to the source.

IAE, I don’t view the occasional posting with an html tag as an heinous crime.
—
john mcwilliams

Must be. This afternoon I tried posting the headers but something in it made Agent deciding against it.

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:58:43 -0000, "Gummo"
wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message

Why don’t you explain from what and how you posted the message that caused the commotion?

Outlook Express, Dave.

Gummo

I sure many more posters are using Outlook Express, Gummo. Obviously this is what you used here as well.
I’m glad your problem with the fonts are solved.
KatWoman came to the rescue of many more a problem.

Subject: Re: Weird Font Issue
Lines: 11
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original

"Dave" wrote in message

I’m glad your problem with the fonts are solved.
KatWoman came to the rescue of many more a problem.

Thanks very much.

Gummo

I can see the HTML cause I have it set to accept that in IE

but to reply it will warn me before sending to change back to plain text for this group (it pops a warning box saying approve to send as HTML or change to plain text)
it is a binary group only plain text allowed
"John McWilliams" wrote in message
John McWilliams wrote:
Dave wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:15:48 +0100, "Fred" wrote:

It’s funny John, I did receive said post
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
It may be the way my News Reader (Fort

"Gummo" wrote in message

"KatWoman" wrote in message

look at the font in character palette and see if there are variations for each letter

Kat – you’re correct. Thanks very much for your help.

Gummo

you are very welcome

took me forever to realize there even was a character palette, and find all the options for type layout in it.
I thought all the text options were up top in the bar, and thought I had to use Illy or other layout program to get more sophisticated choices, like spacing kerning

good to know as well>>you can use the transform tool on text without rasterizing (still editable)

"KatWoman" wrote in message

took me forever to realize there even was a character palette, and find all the options for type layout in it.
I thought all the text options were up top in the bar, and thought I had to use Illy or other layout program to get more sophisticated choices, like spacing kerning

good to know as well>>you can use the transform tool on text without rasterizing (still editable)

Well, for me, an old annoyance has become a new asset to explore.

Gummo

Dave wrote in
news::

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:39:13 -0800, John McWilliams
wrote:

Dave wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:15:48 +0100, "Fred" wrote:

It’s funny John, I did receive said post
exactly the same as this, plain text with a link.
It may be the way my News Reader (Fort

The issue is quite clear now. The OP has a misconfigured news client that does double duty as an email program.

Outlook express can be set to send HTML or plain text to news groups. News raders which comply 100% with the RFCs for news messages (like I use) will display the entire message looking like a web page seen as "view source" by a browser.

More flexible news readers will remove the HTML and just display the text. Outlook Express doesn’t just send the HTML it also sends a plain text notation at the start of the message just in case the news server rejects HTML messages. BLOAT CODE. It is this that non compliant and advanced news readers use to strip out the HTML scripting.
News groups are textural in nature and for the most part, many news servers faced with a pure HTML message will plonk it. Others will strip out the text and only display that.

My Berlin host server is 100% in complliance with the RFCs for news group posting and provided there is plain text at the front of the message, will display the whole thing, presuming someone is providing an example of something and not sending a pure HTML message.
I repeat my earlier message. "It is bad kama to send HTML messages to a text only news group." Something no one can deny.

Thanks for this detailed explanation, Jurgen.
This of course, explain why we had different views.
Sorry if I said something sounding more harsh then meant. This is something to remember.
‘kama’, is this like in ‘karma’?