Thanks for pointing me to the help file, but nothing there refers to PRINT PROJECTS.
Typekit started as a web-based tool. I'm wondering if it can be used for print.
I guess you don't know.
I'm not on the Typekit team, so yes I don't know.
I pointed you to that page because it has information on how to contact the Typekit folks.
This is Ben from Typekit. We have started rolling out the new font sync feature from Typekit in Creative Cloud. You can learn more and sign up for access from this blog post:
You’ll be able to sync the fonts to your computer and use them in all your applications for web mockups, print design, word processing, and more. This help page lists the foundries and faces that will be initially available for desktop:
If you have any further questions, feel free to drop us a line at: email@example.com.
3 people found this helpful
What Ben, from Typekit support, has been traying to tell us underhand is that typekit synced fonts are not allowed to export or package from inDesign, they suppose that the printer must have the fonts synced in their computers too, otherwise they are just floating in the cloud and you can use in your computer but not exporting it.
Thank you adobe, for an useless Typekit feature!!
2 people found this helpful
There is absolutely nothing underhanded about what Ben is telling you.
There are two ways you can use the Typekit fonts for print publishing workflows.
(1) The first way is to compose in InDesign with the Typekit fonts as you would with any fonts that you have otherwise licensed and have installed on your desktop system. For the purposes of printing, export PDF (preferably PDF/X-4 settings) and send the resultant PDF file to your print service provider. All the Typekit fonts are properly embedded in the PDF file and your print service provider should have no issues with printing the text formatted with said fonts.
(2) The second method assumes that your print service provider (or some intermediary) is going to be doing further edits to your work before producing the PDF file that you would have created per (1) above. Typically you would “package” such documents into a directory structure that copies linked content and fonts. The only difference with the Typekit fonts is that such fonts are not included in the package. But since whoever is going to do those further edits and/or PDF export also needs the CC version of InDesign, they will also have access to the same Typekit fonts that you do via the Creative Cloud software. There is no need to package the fonts from them. If they have older CS versions of InDesign, they will not be able to open your CC version InDesign document anyway.
So what is exactly the problem you are complaining about? You have access to the fonts. Your print service provider has access to the fonts (assuming they have the software necessary to even open up your InDesign document).
The only difference is that Typekti fonts are not available as “loose” font files. You can't install them on any system that isn't currently licensed for the Adobe Creative Cloud.
(For what it is worth, common practice notwithstanding, the ability to package the fonts - other than Typekit fonts and certain Asian fonts - used in an InDesign document does not free the recipient of the obligation to fully and properly license such fonts. The packaging operation is provided as a convenience, not as a substitute for properly licensing the digital assets in question!)
I have a question...
If I'm using Creative Cloud with Typekit, and my printer has CS6 and I down save my file and collect it, how will they be able to get those fonts then?
See my March 17 response in this thread. It does answer your question and offers you solutions including sending your print service provider a PDF/X-4 file exported from InDesign as opposed to sending the InDesign document and all the assets including fonts, links, etc. in a package. If your print service provider has CS6 only by virtue of a perpetual license, i.e. not a Creative Cloud subscription, he will not have access to the TypeKit fonts unless he licenses them separately from Adobe or whichever font foundry created the font for TypeKit. (Important note, not all the fonts provided by TypeKit are part of the Adobe Type Library and individually licensable from Adobe other than via TypeKit)
Does this mean the end of paying for fonts and licensing?
Red Mullet wrote:
Does this mean the end of paying for fonts and licensing?
No it doesn't. Part of your subscription for Creative Cloud pays for the licensing.
Plus, if you want to assure that you will always have access to the exact fonts that you use in a project, TypeKit might not be the right solution for you. Also understand that TypeKit's collection is only a small subset of the Adobe Type Library and a minuscule subset of fonts available from all foundries.
Dov, I believe that is exactly the issue. What happens when you have to package something for someone who hasn't (or won't, for this reason among others) upgraded to the latest version of Creative Cloud?
I work in an enterprise environment. We haven't switched, largely because Adobe still, more than a year later, has not released enterprise tools. We're receiving a growing number of media created in different versions of Creative Cloud. We insist that anyone submitting work send it in CS6-compatible formats.
Now, what happens when our hapless freelancer, who used a font library they regarded as "free," tries to package their IDML file, and they can't collect the fonts?
We have some print vendors who insist on flattened PDF/X-1a files, while our standard is X-4. Not everyone has jumped on the bandwagon of the latest and (perhaps not) greatest.
Also, we're already having enough issues with differing versions of fonts, without adding an additional library to the mix. We've licensed several libraries, Adobe's among them. Now what happens when we create our files with our (otherwise current) OT versions, and hand those files off to a vendor, who opens them in their new CC version, and activates the TK versions, because that's the prompt that comes up first?
If you package an InDesign document including the fonts and the document is subsequently opened within that package, InDesign will use the fonts in the package if available, then fonts installed on the system, and only then would prompt with the “missing fonts” dialog including TypeKit support. In other words, TypeKit is the last resort.
What happens if at some point you cease paying for TypeKit? In the case of a website, the font will cease taking effect. In the case of a finished print design however, you can't really recall the work. Does the work therefore cease to be legal? Say if in ten years, I stop paying for TypeKit, and I had used a font for the TypeKit in a business' business cards. Are those business cards now illegally using the font?
Any clarification on this point would be helpful.
No, existing content in “final form format” such as PDF with fonts embedded are not “illegal” in any way. Continue to use as you would any such content. You can even place such content into other new content. What you no longer have is the font for creation of new content or editing of older content in layout or design applications (or for that matter, any office software).
You make this sound so easy. I have a designer who has different fonts than I. He packaged the file for me and created a PDF. The PDF goes to the printer. No problems yet. now my designer is away for 2 months o a missions trip and I need to make a change to the file for an update (found a mistake that needs to be fixed before reprinting). I open the package and get a missing font error.
Shouldn't the font be in the package for this document? I do not want to use it on any other, just to fix this one. I now have to wait till my designer returns.
I'm going to require all who work for me have and use the fonts I own. the minion font will be replace by actual objects and not font items so I can have access to them.
There must be a better way!
I'm using CS6 an PC 8.5 while my designers use macs.
Hi Mr/Ms Bookshelf,
My best guess is that your “designer” is using Macintosh-format Type 1 and/or TrueType fonts which are unfortunately, not cross-platform compatible. Looking in the Document Fonts sub-directory of the packaged document, you will probably see some zero-length files. Those would be those Macintosh-only format fonts. (Technically, the issue is that these fonts put all their data in the Macintosh file system's “resource fork” which is invisible to Windows file systems which only has the equivalent of the MacOS “data fork.”)
The full workaround for this issue is to standardize of OpenType fonts which are fully cross-platform compatible and on MacOS reside totally in the font file's “data fork.” In that way, you can fully work on documents prepared by your designer and when returned to the designer will still be compatible with the designer's system.
Note in the interest of full disclosure: The document package feature of InDesign as well as Illustrator still requires that the receiver of the package being fully licensed for the fonts in the package! The package is a convenience and absolutely not a legal license extension for the fonts in the package!
Hopefully this helps you understand what is going on in your particular situation. If not, please provide a few more details.
This has been a most annoying issue, but you have made it clear as to
why. So I know it's not just my system or me doing some thing wrong.
I will try to get my designers to use Open Type that we all have the
Thanks for your help and patience.
Manager for Believers Bookshelf USA.
Without trying to digress much from the original question, I would love to point out two issues everybody seems to keep avoiding:
1. Typekit and Adobe option to use fonts for your projects with the price included in your CC subscription, is one of the best things that happened to the designer's world. I've been working in design for almost 20 years, and for many of them I had to limit my design to three or four classic fonts that I had purchased.
2. The complains here seem to come from the fact that people don't understand that you should purchase (license) the fonts you use for your design. Type designers expend months and months creating these fonts, and should not give them for free. True to be told, on the other side, fonts are so expensive that it makes it almost impossible for a freelancer, and even a mid company to justify the purchase of more than 5 fonts (plus the whole single license per computer). Maybe Typography Houses should understand why there are so many piracy regarding fonts, and should come up with a system that benefits everybody.
3. In any case, sending your files to the printer with the fonts, is giving them away for free (pirate). The printer should have a pretty large collection as part of their service. That's their profession. If not, sending PDF is the right way to go.
2 people found this helpful
Luis Sanz wrote:
…3. In any case, sending your files to the printer with the fonts, is giving them away for free (pirate). The printer should have a pretty large collection as part of their service. That's their profession. If not, sending PDF is the right way to go.
Agreed! What is important to point out is that a “printer” really should not be mucking around with your source documents and assets (InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop documents plus font, image, color profile, etc. assets). The designer should be creating print-ready PDF files, preferably complying with the PDF/X-4 standard (full color management and live transparency, embedded fonts) and sending those PDF files to the printer. Some “printers” like the ability to “fix things” and thus ask for all those assets. In my experience, more often, what they think are fixes actually break or ruin things. If the printer really thinks, based on preflighting the PDF file that there is a likely problem, it should be fixed in the source documents by the designer and a new PDF file created and submitted.
1 person found this helpful
Well I beg to differ with you. I will never use Typekit fonts again. I have just spent the last hour and a half trying to figure out why I can not package the fonts in my Indesign file. I very busy at work and dont have the time to be dicking around because of constant upgrades that change everything. I thought I would try Typekit, but forget it. I have always used Suitcase and I advise everyone to can Typekit and use Suitcase. I work for a very large international company, with hundreds of different suppliers and internal users who do not all have the latest version of Indesign. Not everyone is on the blood sucking CC. Yes don't deny it. I have been using Indesign for 30 years. I used to be able to own my product and upgrade every 3 years. All worked fine and I wasn't spending $50 a month on my software. So not everyone has Typekit. Duh.
InDesign only came out in 2003. But I understand what you're trying to say.
There's always converting fonts to outlines, if it's not body text and you're reasonably sure you won't change it again...
Actually, it was released in '99. I was using it in 2000. It was actually the perfect mix of Pagemaker and Quark.
Is it acceptable to install desktop version of the font on a web server under the TypeKit license? We use TypeKit on the site, and we render pdfs on the site. The PDF renderer needs desktop versions for embed purposes to make the files look correct.
Unfortunately Typekit is not able to provide font files for download. Embedding is not permitted in Typekit's terms of service.
Typekit's license certainly does permit embedding of Typekit fonts in PDF files. It is packaging such fonts by InDesign or Illustrator that is not permitted!
For example, if I have an InDesign or Illustrator document that uses a Typekit font, exporting (InDesign) or saving (Illustrator) to PDF will indeed embed those fonts (usually subsetted to the glyphs actually used) into the resultant PDF file. Such embedded fonts are not “full” fonts that can be extracted and otherwise used, but what is embedded is all that is necessary for PDF renderers (screen and print) to properly render the text with the desired typeface!!!
I apologize, I should've clarified. The user posted: "We use TypeKit on the site, and we render pdfs on the site."
In my mind this describes a web application that is creating new PDFs that do not come from desktop programs like InDesign or Illustrator. While embedding fonts in PDFs from these applications is allowed, we cannot provide fonts that allow unlicensed parties to create documents.