Making Font Larger Than 72pt

Is there a way to make a font larger than 72pt in Illustrator CC?
Thanks,
Sheri

Just type whatever size you want into the size field in the Character panel.

Similar Messages

Is it possible to have fonts larger than 72pt?

Have been looking for a work around for this problem for awhile now but can't seem to get anywhere. Is it possible to have fonts bigger than 72pt? If not that is a massive fail.

I see what you mean now, it seems to be an issue with artwork PDF forms, I don't have a problem with a standard PDF form.
I did get the font size to stick, https://acrobat.com/#d=RnEQbNdhe26z-bPYyVnEYQ is my sample.
But I had to edit the XML Source (from the View menu), so the line;
<body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:xfa="http://www.xfa.org/schema/xfa-data/1.0/"><p>99</p></body>
became
<body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:xfa="http://www.xfa.org/schema/xfa-data/1.0/"><p style="font-size:300pt">99</p></body>
That is I added the font-size style attribute.
Hope that helps.
Bruce

Font size larger than 72pt?

I'm new to this product, so this may be a stupid question...
I'm trying to create a pdf with form fields. In one field, a text field, I want the font size to be around 150pt. However, it's not available in the dropdown, so I type it into the font size field and hit enter. It appears in the design view with the new, larger size, but when I go to Preview PDF it shows up very small. However, when I use one of the drop down font sizes it works just fine. Oh, and I have allowed multiple lines and tried both rich text and plain text. Frankly, I've played with this field in every way I can imagine to get the 150pts (or even anything other than the drop down sizes) to show, and I just can't get it to work.
Help?

Works fine for me ....I wonder if it has something to do with the font you are using!
Paul

HP Laserjet Pro 200 color M251nw does not print font larger than 48 using Office WORD 2013

If a create a new Word document and I type letters of 72 font, the letters do not print. If the font size is reduced to 48 then it prints. The brand new printer is connected to my laptop via USB. I'm using an HP Laptop Pro 7420s, 32 bit with MS Office H&B 2013. Any ideas as to what should I check? Thank you.
This question was solved.
View Solution.

Hi,
Install the latest firmware for the printer, that should address this type of issues.
For a USB connection use the following tool:
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/softwareDownloadIndex?softwareitem=lj-108129-8&cc=us&dlc=en&lc=en...
For network connection follow these steps:
http://support.hp.com/us-en/product/HP-LaserJet-Pro-200-color-Printer-M251nw/5097632/model/5097639/d...
Regards,
Shlomi
Say thanks by clicking the Kudos thumb up in the post.
If my post resolve your problem please mark it as an Accepted Solution

All of a sudden I can't change my Photoshop CS4 Font size any larger than 18px. What did I do?

Hi
I was working on a logo today in Photoshop. I clicked on the font size to increase the text size from 18px to 30px. I got a message that I couldn't go any larger than 18 px. Any idea how to fix this???
Thanks
Sarahb

Please note that your post is already buried in the old pages of the forum.
Due to the current unavailability of clairvoyants and mind-readers in the forum, we respectfully request you supply sensible, complete details.
BOILERPLATE TEXT:
Note that because this is boilerplate text, not all points may apply to any given, specific poster.
If you give complete and detailed information about your setup and the issue at hand,
such as your platform (Mac or Win),
exact versions of your OS, of Photoshop (not just "CS6", but something like CS6v.13.0.6) and of Bridge,
your settings in Photoshop > Preference > Performance
the type of file you were working on,
machine specs, such as total installed RAM, scratch file HDs, total available HD space, video card specs, including total VRAM installed,
what troubleshooting steps you have taken so far,
what error message(s) you receive,
if having issues opening raw files also the exact camera make and model that generated them,
if you're having printing issues, indicate the exact make and model of your printer, paper size, image dimensions in pixels (so many pixels wide by so many pixels high). if going through a RIP, specify that too.
etc.,
someone may be able to help you (not necessarily this poster).
a screen shot of your settings or of the image could be very helpful too.
Please read this FAQ for advice on how to ask your questions correctly for quicker and better answers:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/419981?tstart=0
Thanks!

Why are step numbers larger than text font?

I just upgraded from RH7 to RH9, I find that when I generate Webhelp, the autonumbers in steps are larger than the font used in the text. This only shows up in the generated output, not the source. Bulleted lists, on the other hand, look fine. Bullet size is commensurate with text font size.

Thanks again, William. I think that is a good suggestion. However, for some reason, the problem seems to have corrected itself. Several webhelp generations produced the anomoly, so it wasn't just a quirk of one compile. In fact, I think I saw this when using the trial version a month or so ago. Anyway, the only thing I did that might have affected this change is that I changed style sheets to the default for on compile and then switched back to my custom style sheet. Now I am generating ordered lists with the correct font size.
If the problem appears again, the first thing I'll do is try your latest suggestion.
thanks again.

Making the font larger

is there a way to increase the font size on the nano?? I have poor eye sight and I have to kind of squint in order to read the nano screen. It's not as bad ont he regular ipod but even that i would prefer to be larger. Is there a way to make the font size larger or is there some kind of software that can be downloaded to make the font larger? btw, i do not have an ipod yet but am thinking of purchasing one. i have played with them several times at the apple store and the font size is one of the drawbacks.

Unfortunately no. This is the only thing I found to help my tired eyes (a little old timer humor).
G4 DP-1G, 1G RAM, 22 Display, 2-80G HD, QT 7.0.3P Mac OS X (10.4.3) Canon S400, i850 & LIDE 50, Epson R200, 2G Nano

Compressor setting so it won't output a video larger than source?

Hello.
I am sending a whole library of videos (most Apple ProRes, but varrying video dimensions based on the project) through Compressor 4 and I'm having an issue where, for some of the videos (with smaller video dimensions), the settings I'm choosing result in the transcoded videos being larger (in terms of dimensions) than the source (ie. if the source is 720p, the resulting video is 1080p).
I am using the following two settings:
- HD for Apple Devices (5 Mbps)
- HD 1080p for Video Sharing
Example 1 - I fed a 640 x 360 (Apple ProRes) file into Compressor 4 and selected the "HD for Apple Devices (5 Mbps)" preset. The resulting transcoded video was larger than 640 x 360 (I can't remember the actual size anymore, sorry). There is no option available, that I can see, to modify the preset to NOT create a file larger than the source?
Example 2 - I fed a 720p (Apple Animation) file into Compressor 4 and selected the "HD 1080p for Video Sharing" preset. The resulting transcoded video was 1080p. I though because the preset is marked "Up to 1920 x 1080" it wouldn't go beyond 1080p (ie. scale down anything larger to 1080p), but also thought that it would maintain the source dimensions and not enlarge a 720p source to 1080p?
Maybe this is how Compressor is supposed to work (ie. making resulting videos larger than source), but I'm hoping there's a way to modify the presets to not do this "ie. an option to not create a video with dimensions larger than the source)? Is this possible?
Thanks,
Kristin.

Apple devices have a standard frame size they encode to, so yes, this is how it works.

Why is menu size so much larger than the files?

I am somewhat perplexed - I'm making a single-layer dvd and have a simple single screen theme (no animation) - it has one drop zone. The movie has 28 chapters so there are five of them, but so far I've added only one montage of photos to each menu page - it's a "mobile" quality in media browser and ave only 10 - 20 MB, then one song. On average these movie clips are 1:00 to 2:00 min long and the music is cut to that length. So, all told, it's probably less than 110 MB in files - but when I look at the project properties, the menus are 3301 MB!!!
The movie itself is only 1.1 GB so what is going on?
It's preventing me from doing the project and I've got no idea why it's making the menu size so much larger than the file sizes?
Can you please help me figure out what to do?
Alexa

The 2 min clips were natively 2 min - I had each one separate and actually converted to media browser in "mobile" size (b/c the drop zone was 4 x 6 in size in the theme). They were tiny - in most cases I was shortening the audio (e.g. the song was 4 minutes and I was setting the loop to only 1:30 b/c that's how long the video clip was on the menu).
BUT, to resolve the question (I always like to post the answer) - I ended up duplicating the project to try to reimport the video. It was a fresh iDVD project and I happened to click on the project tree of screens - and, lo and behold, the ENTIRE menu was duplicated for some reason (and the movie, actually). I went back to the original and it was the same! I have no idea how that would happen do you? It only had one main menu screen - and then an entire duplicate menu - which I wouldn't even know how to access if I didn't see it in the project menu tree?
The only think of is that at one point I added a title menu link to the scene selection - it gave me a warning that my menu was more than 12 minutes, did I want to fix or ignore and fix later - which confused me b/c it was under 12 min, then but I clicked ignore. Does that create an alternate title menu and send people back to something else?
Anyway, I deleted the entire extra scene selection menus (5 of them) and it was back to under 4 GB.
So, I was able to burn, but still wondering about creating the "title menu" link on scene selections? It drives me crazy that it doesn't automatically do that so I like to add "main menu" links.
Thanks for your help!
Alexa

Web Photo gallery larger than 800x600?

After I create a web photo gallery the verticals need to be scrolled. Any way to make the photo gallery larger than 800x600. Most people have larger screens now.
I have Golive and cant seem to adjust the size there either, not an expert.
Doug

Take the Bridge-created index.html page (and associated folders and files) and copy them to your Dreamweaver site folder, making sure not to overwrite your existing index page or folders - you may want to rename the Bridge-created files something else (add a 2 to the name or whatever). Then open the Bridge created index.html file with Dreamweaver, switch to code view, and then select all the code and copy it to your clipboard. Now open up your own Dreamweaver page (or create a new page in your Dreamweaver managed site) and switch to code view, select all, and paste the previously copied code into it. Make sure to double check that any URL's point correctly to where your resources are (i.e. make sure that wherever your photos are called in the code point to the folder and image where that particular folder is located within the Dreamweaver site).
Hope this helps.

Album and artist title larger than other album titles?

When viewing my music through grid view and sorting by albums one of the titles for one of my albums have a larger font size than any of the other in my library. It's not the selected or the currently played album. It's the first of a few albums of the same artist, but its only with this particular artist that this occurs. I've compared the "get info" tags on this album do the other by the same artist and they all seem to be the same. I have no idea why this is happening. I've tried the usual, restart, changing thumbnail size, tried different viewing modes etc etc.
Anyone have any idea why this is?

Hi David and Welcome to Apple Discussions ...
Quit iTunes. This might be a corrupted iTunes preference file... locate this file: com.apple.iTunes.plist
/Users/YourName/Library/Preferences. Drag that file from the Preferences folder to your Desktop. Launch iTunes, and look at that one album title and see if it's the correct font size. if it is, drag that .plist file to the Trash, empty the Trash and reboot.
Post back if you need more help.
Carolyn

Is there a way to make the font larger in the Messages app without changing the font size in Mail, Constacts, Calendars, and Notes?

Is there a way to increase the font size in the texting app, Messages, in IOS 8 without making the font larger in Contacts, Mail, Calendar or Notes?
I just want to increase the font size in Messages, and no where else.

No I do not believe there is
The adjustment for the font from settings affects the font globally
(996)

Making a large banner

this was my first time creating a huge project. it was a 12ft long banner.
using illustrator i created it.
ok so first i set the rasterizing effects to 300ppi. was i not suppose to? i gave me a probe saying i had to much artwork or something... but then it worked...
then i stretched a large photo a bit and it didn't look like it pixelated at all so i was happy......it was just a texture for the background set to overlay....you can barely see it....
the worst is the gradient under the texture. its totally pixelated in the background.
annoyed i went to photoshop and tried making the gradient and it still looked pixelated!!!!
help

Eric,
When discussing appropriate raster image resolution, a little technical understanding is necessary, but common sense applies.
Digital printing devices make tiny fixed-size marks called printer spots. Printer spots do not vary in size (expressed as Spots Per Inch).
Printer spots are used to "build up" images of halftone dots which varying size in order to suggest to the human eye varying tints of the ink(s).
Raster images consist of square pixels.
If the square pixels of the raster image being printed are scaled to a size large enough for their square shape to be rendered by the pattern of roundish halftone dots, that's when "pixelation" (aka "jaggies") occurs. So there is a relationship between the size of the scale of the image pixels (expressed as Pixels Per Inch) and the frequency of the halftone dots (expressed as Lines Per Inch) that will be used to render them.
There is a much too-often cited myth that "everything in print should be rasterized to 300 ppi." That is nonsense. The rule-of-thumb is 1 to 2 times the halftone ruling, and that rule-of-thumb assumes normal size print viewed at hand-held distance.
Therefore:
For normal hand-held printing like magazines, newspapers, etc., anything between 1 to 2 times the halftone ruling is servicable for most grayscale or full color raster objects. That's a range. It doesn't mean that "if 1 x halftone ruling is okay, then 2 x halftone ruling must be great." It does not mean that, for any given image, 300 PPI is automatically better than 225 PPI or 150 PPI, or any other resolution. For most photographs, properly sharpened and placed on the page at 100%, 1.5 x the halftone ruling is just fine, and going higher is usually just needless overkill.
Example: Typical magazine ad. Web printed on coated stock with a halftone ruling of 150 LPI: 225 PPI for your raster photos is fine, assuming they are properly sharpened and are not enlarged after placing on your page layout.
Example: Typical newspaper ad. Web printed on crappy uncoated newsprint with a haftone ruling of 100 LPI: 150 PPI for your raster photos is fine, assuming they are properly sharpened and are not enlarged after placing on your page layout.
Note that the above assumes photos. Photos are not the only raster images used. Read on.
Whenever you resort to raster images just to achieve a continuous-tone grad or soft fuzzy shadow or whatever (in other words, raster effects), just using a PPI equal to the halftone ruling is a gracious plenty. Your concern in such situations is not to preserve any pristine detail or subtle texture of some photographer's "masterpiece." Your only concern about a fuzzy drop shadow or glow is to avoid noticable pixelation (jaggies). What is pixelation? It's just the condition of the squareness of the raster image pixels being visible to the viewer.
Now considering that halftone dots are round and that image pixels are square, ask yourself this question: Can the shape of a square ever be faithfully rendered by a single round dot? No. So as long as your square pixels are not larger than the halftone dots that will be used to render them, will anyone be able to detect the stair-stepped squareness of the grayscale or color pixels? No.
But there's another use for raster images other than photos: 1-bit raster images printed as a solid (raster line art). Often, 1-bit solid-colored raster images do not become halftoned at all. They are built up not out of relatively course halftone dots, but out of the much smaller printer spots that a printing device uses in order to build halftone dots. Those tiny printer spots, then, are much more capable of rendering the squareness of the pixels in your 1-bit raster image. So in that kind of situation, you want to use a raster PPI fine enough to look smooth to the naked eye, even if it is stair-stepped.
That doesn't mean you have to make the PPI of 1-bit raster images equal to the SPI capability of the imaging device. Typically, PostScript imagesetters are capable of printing at least 2540 SPI. But on all but the sharpest printing on high-quality coated stock, few viewers are going to see the jaggedness of a 1200 PPI solid.
Now note that all the above assumes normal hand-held viewing distance. Read on.
Is anyone going to read a 12-foot-wide banner at arm's length? Of course not. All large format printing is done so that something can be read at a longer-than-arm's-length distance. So you can think of the viewing distance as a "down scale" factor which achieves the same purpose as what is considered "normal" PPI at "normal" hand-held reading distance. You can make a big study of it if you want to, but the end result is that you can pretty much use the same PPI that is appropriate for something designed for hand-held distance, and blow the whole thing up (including the halftone dots) to larger scale for distance viewing.
That's why if you both to check (which is not difficult to do; just take a pocket ruler and approach a billboard next chance you get), you'll find that very large format halftone printing involves halftone rulings as low as 50 or even 30 LPI. So if, for example, you assume a large format halftone ruling of 50 LPI, what can you safely assume as a practical range for the raster PPI when enlarged to that scale? Remember: 1-to-2-times the halftone ruling; therefore, 50 to 100 PPI.
Now...realize again that all the above, for the sake of explanation, is presented in the context of halftone printing. You have not yet specified the printing device, what halftone ruling will be used, or whether halftoning will be used at all.
Nowadays, large format composite digital printers designed for one-off prints (or very low print runs) don't use halftoning at all. Instead of using their printer spots to "assemble" halftone dots to simulate tints, they randomly distribute their printer spots more sparsely for light tints and more densely for dark tints. In other words, instead of varying the size of uniformly-spaced halftone dots, they vary the spacing of uniformly-sized printer spots. The method is generally referred to as stochastic screening, and it is far more common than you think; it is the screening method most commonly used in most so-called "photo quality" desktop inkjet printers. It is also nowadays most commonly used in large format printers.
Stochastic screening allows relatively low-resolution (low SPI) devices to achieve what looks like greater detail than what would result if those relatively course printer spots had to be "used up" to build halftone dots. So generally speaking, stochastic screening can render acceptable sharpness and detail on lower resolution devices--which in turn also require lower PPI raster resolution. So even if you use the halftone-centric rules-of-thumb, stochastic screening works to your advantage. (Think of it as an additional measure of "safety margin.")
So there may be some other factor coming into play if your printer is telling you that your images (which sound to me to be grossly oversampled) are "pixelating". For one long-common example, when you print a format intended for a PostScript device (EPS content) to a non-PostScript printer, what gets printed is a screen-resolution raster "placeholder" raster image. That problem afflicts even the vector content of an EPS file.
You need to specify the output device type, screening method, and the details of the workflow (file formats,etc.) you are using. Also be aware: you can't always be sure the output provider actually understands the matters described above any better than you do.
Also how do they have those huge posters hanging in Manhattan with pictures of people? Arent those jpeg's?
Why would you assume that a large format print is necessarily printed from a JPEG file?
JET

Why are ACR PSD files 10-20 percent larger than the same file resaved in PSD?

Why are ACR > PSD files 10-20 percent larger than the same file resaved in PSD? I posted this many years ago and never found an answer. Now that my drives fill up quicker, I thought I might chase this question a little bit further.
Same .CR2 saved within ACR either with cmd-R or open ACR within PSD, the saved file is 34.5mb. Resave that same file (no edits) within PSD either with or without Max-compatible and the file is now 30.7mb. Another file that is 24.5 becomes 19.5MB.
Why the difference? Is ACR and PSD actually using different compression strategies?
thanks.
Mac 10.8.5 / CC / ACR 8.4.1 - but this has been a consistent behavior over many years and versions, CS6 / CC.
Same .CR2 saved within ACR either with cmd-R or open ACR within PSD, the saved file is 34.5mb. Resave that same file (no edits) within PSD either with or without Max-compatible and the file is now 30.7mb. Another file that is 24.5 becomes 19.5MB.

Hi Jeff
If it is RLE it's not as efficient as LZW:
Saved ACR>PSD = 40.1MB (sample image this AM)
opened in PS and resaved as PSD = 30.8MB
resaved as TIF without LZW = 40.1MB (this adds to your thought that the ACR>PSD doesn't us any compression)
resaved as TIF/LZW = 9.6MB
Jeff Schewe wrote:
I really think your priorities are a bit off. 10-20% is meaningless...you just need to get bigger.... and quit fussing over a few GB's here or there...
??? I hope that the Adobe engineers are fussing over 10-20% efficiencies.
I'm within arms reach to a rack of 40TB of drives (doesn't include off-site drives), and all 2TB drives are being recycled to 4TB drives, as a result the rack is always growing. Actually the ACR>PSD files don't really make a difference in our long term storage, only for the nightly backups. But anyway, how you save, what you save etc. should all be part of the discussion.
.... so in my case, throw in an excess MB here and there and all of a sudden you are talking TB's. Plus advantages in backup times, drive life, and energy use.
Somebody added compression into the PS>PSD format, but it wasn't included in the ACR>PSD format, was it a decision or an oversight? If it's just a matter of making ACR compatible with PS when saving the same PSD format..... then why not?
regards,
j

I cannot print anything larger than a 4x5" from LR4 to my Epson 3880

No matter what I do I cannot print pictures larger than a 4x5" image from LR4 to my Epson 3880.
I have doublechecked all of my settings in the page and print sections. I have even watched various internet training on printing from LR4 including Matt Kloskowski in Kelby Training....all to no avail.
I have absolutely no problem with printing in PS CS6.

The problem continues to be exporting a photo from IPHOTO to PE 9 organizer
Why do this? You're just making life harder. If you want to use iphoto as your image manager, don't use organizer, or vice versa. If you want to use iphoto to organize your photos, set up PSE as your external editor there, or export the photos to the desktop, save the edited photos as new images and reimport them to iphoto. Using both only makes your life harder and creates problems, as you've discovered.

Making Font Larger Than 72pt

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for