Why do many Typekit fonts look bad on publish of Muse website?

I have published more than a dozen websites with Adobe Muse and Typekit fonts. I have really been drawn to Typekit and the beautifull fonts it brings into Muse. When I am in design mode on a Muse site the fonts look great. My problem is when I preview the site withing Adobe Muse or publish it online the fonts rasterize terribly. I understand that certain fonts display better smaller or bigger but even when I apply this knowledge in my design it still often shows a lack of clarity in fonts. Is there a way to help these fonts appear better? Perhaps I am missing something here but what I don't know.

Every OS, OS version and browser renders live text differently. This is true of fonts served from Typekit as well as fonts installed in the local system. I expect the variation you're seeing is the differences between the AIR rendering in the Design view, the Webkit rendering in Muse Preview and the browser+OS+OS version rendering for whatever environment you're using.
There's a 7 part blog post on typekit.com that explains all the interactions and variations across OSes, OS versions and browsers.
http://blog.typekit.com/2010/10/05/type-rendering-on-the-web/

Similar Messages

Fonts look bad in OSX jagged text

Hello
I thought apple gave us font smoothing in OSX! My fonts look terrible in QuarkXpress6.0. Is this what I have to look forward to? I miss my ATM.
I did the "font smoothing thing" in appearence-no change.
Also will all my older fonts from when I used OS 7 +8, will these still work in OSX? and by Quark XPress?
Please enlighten me!
all fonts look bad; Goudy old style, bellvue etc. (postscript type 1)
imac G5 Mac OS X (10.4.4) 21" screen

if I zoom out in Quark to view document at say 125% the 45 pt type really looks bad
Hmm. I'm unable to duplicate your problem. I've pasted some random text into Quark, sized it to 45 pt and set the zoom to 125%. No matter if I go up or down, the fonts look very smooth with both Goudy Old Style and News Gothic (I have the Adobe version, not MT, which is from MonoType). Well, if I look real close, I can see a little bit of jaggies around curves. But nothing very noticable.
Is your 21" monitor a CRT or LCD? LCD always produce the best image when used at their native resolution. A CRT's best display varies depending on whether it has a shadow mask or aperture grill tube. If your monitor has an independent control for sharpening, it may be too high.
I have some fonts installed that I don't know where they came from ex: News Gothic MT (Microsoft I think) Will these view and print okay in any program?
As long as it's a standard Mac suitcase style TrueType font, or a complete and proper Type 1 PostScript font, it should just as well as any other.
I keep all my fonts in classic folder and manage w/font book (thats another story) It seems that my classic apps, Illustrator, see most of the fonts all the time eventhough I turned many off in fontbook. Also illustrator doesn't see ALL the fonts.
That's a handful. When it comes to Classic, the rules are a little different. Fonts you manually place into the OS 9 Fonts folder, or are put there by the OS when activating them from Font Book with OS 9 as the choice to be activated for, fonts are then available to both Classic and OS X.
If you deactivate them in Font Book, the fonts will become unavailable to OS X apps. However, any Classic apps will continue to see them until you shut down all OS 9 applications and Classic. In other words, once you open fonts for Classic, they can't be closed to Classic without shutting the entire environment down. Confused yet?
As far as Illustrator not seeing all the fonts, that relates to this part of your question:
Please explain the limitations of classic apps and fonts.
Classic can use any fonts that were in existence for the Mac before OS X. All of your older Mac TrueType and Type 1 PostScript fonts will work in OS X and Classic. Fonts that will work as is in OS X that you couldn't use before on a Mac are PC TrueType fonts. If you have copied any of the OS X .dfonts into the OS 9 Fonts folder, those will not work. A .dfont is a variation of a TrueType font, with the data in the data fork rather than the resource fork as they are with the older Mac TrueType fonts. Neither OS 9 or any Classic apps can read these fonts. Those are likely the ones not showing up in Illustrator.
It sounds like you do a lot of work with fonts. While Apple has improved Font Book quite a bit in Tiger, it's still very much a consumer font manager for those who handle fonts only occasionally. You'd be much better off using a font manager such as Suitcase X1 or Font Agent Pro.

Why are the TypeKit fonts I am syncing not showing up for use in Illustrator?

Hi there,
I am beyond frustrated right now. But that's neither here nor there for anyone reading this so I will get to the point.
I have synced the TypeKit font, Tablet Gothic Wide to my Mac, but it simply won't show up as a font choice in Illustrator. Any help here would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Sam

Hi Sam,
I'm sorry that you ran into trouble with this. I've confirmed that the font selections are added to your account correctly.
In case you weren't aware, the Creative Cloud application needs to be running on your computer in order for the fonts to be synced. If you don't have that installed, you can download it for free from https://creative.adobe.com/products
Once you have Creative Cloud running:
- Are the fonts showing up in the Fonts tab of Creative Cloud?
- If you haven't done so already, would you please try turning off font sync in the Creative Cloud application, wait a moment, and then turn it back on? The option to do this is under the gear icon in Preferences > Fonts ("sync on/off"). Sometimes the app just needs a fresh session for the fonts to appear again.
If that doesn't make a difference, please send your recent sync log files to Typekit Support at [email protected] so that we can look into it further.
Thank you,
-- liz
On OS X:
* Open the Finder
* under the Go menu, select "Go To Folder"
* in the window that opens, type: /Users/(username)/Library/Application Support/Adobe/CoreSync/
Remember to replace "(username)" with your own account name.
(Or if you are comfortable working from the Terminal, cd to $HOME/Library/Application Support/Adobe/CoreSync/)
Attach the 3 or 4 most recent CoreSync-yyyy-MM-dd.log files to an email. Please don't send a zip file, as they often get flagged as spam.

Fonts looking bad after upload

Hi,
I have used a special font, by that I mean a font which will not be found on most computers. Now within some elements, such as a some buttons, a few graphics, the font appears perfectly. When I check on other PC's the font is not what I had selected. Also, the font, when I run the movie through Flash CS4, appears perfect, but once I upload it, the font is not smooth and looks bad. I read up a little about embedding characters, and even tried the option which comes in the text box properties, but nothing seems to help. I don't think I grasped the concept well. Can anyone please explain how I can get my font to appear and look good on all PCs??
Thanks,
Aditi

Is this all dynamic text or is it text that is manually written in to the file at authoring time such that it could be static text? If it is static text but you are using dynamic textfields, then try switching them to be static textfields. If it is already static textfields, then you could try breaking the textfields down to being raw graphics (select the textfield, then choose Modify -> Break Apart, Modify -> Break Apart)
If they must be dynamic textfields, and using the embed option in the properties panel isn't working, then try embedding the font in the library and use it from there... To do that... in the library in the upper right is a small menu where you can select "New Font"... choose that and select the font you want from the list. Then you can assign that embedded font as you normally would, but you need to find the name it has in the library and in trhe font selection it will have an asterisk next to it. So if the Font is named "Font 1" in the library, then in the font selection in the properties panel it will appear as "Font 1* "

Exporting PDF format for web viewing, fonts look bad

Hey everybody I'm relatively new to indesign so sorry if this is a simple one. I'm doing a newsletter in indesign, which will be used stricktly for web viewing. Whenever I export the file as a pdf the body text fonts look a bit off, as though they are slightly pixelated around the edges. This is not as noticable in the artcile titles with larger font, but any smaller font (i'm using size 14, and futura book) and it gets this pixelation, it is even more noticeable in the thinner type sets of the font. Another odd thing is the first page of the newsletter the fonts are more messed up looking than the following pages where the same font types and sizes are used, the only major difference is the first page has a photo on it, but the fonts that look weird are below the photo not overlaying it or anything like that. I turned off all the compression on the pdf export, also tried it will varying amounts of compression but still have the same issue. And I am viewing this in Mac's Preview program, not acrobat.

Ok, just checked through all the flattening preview highlights and everything looked fine in that. Since my exported document looked perfectly fine in acrobat, but sort of pixelated in mac's preview, is there any way around that?
If you are serving the PDF via a web address it will very likely be viewed in a browser (not downloaded and opened in an app like Preview or Reader). All of the browser displays have slightly different anti-aliasing, which you can see if you zoom in on a screen capture of the text. Here's a line of text from your PDF at 100%, magnified to 400% in Photoshop. From top to bottom Safari, Chrome, Firefox:
There's nothing you can do about the anti-aliasing quality of the different browsers and apps. The PDF you posted has live transparency, so it isn't a flattening issue.

TypeKit Fonts Not Displaying When Published to Web

Hello everyone. After noodling around the forums, I found the method for using non-Edge fonts from TypeKit in a Muse site. For some reason, however, it doesn't seem to work. My workflow if below. Is there something I'm missing? Is there a specific font I should be using in Muse in the hopes it gets overwritten by TypeKit?
1. Setup and publish TypeKit.
     a. Added Adobe Garamond Pro as font.
     b. Created selector of .body_garapro for that font.
     c. Publish changes.
2. In Muse:
     a. Copy embed code from TypeKit into Head via page properties for Master Page.
     b. Create paragraph style called body_garapro. (In this paragraph style, I tried using good old web safe font Arial and the edge web font Garamond EB. In either case neither was replaced. I made sure not to use a system font to avoid the image output issue.)
     c. Export site as HTML, upload via FTP to domain entered into TypeKit...and no TypeKit replacement.
I also made sure that my test text had no overrides and was using the straight body_garapro paragraph style.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Chris

In the web template properties there was a setting named "Force Variable Screen Display" make sure it is checked.
And also see if this helps:
Re: Force Variable screen with Web Templates?
Gili

Why do my fonts look bad in jre1.5.0_07?

The project I'm working on at the moment which I finally had working well, now needs to be upgraded to run with jre1.5.0_07. What I find weird is when I run it with the jre1.5.0_07, the text looks fine until i print it, then it looks really bad, depending on which font and font size I use certain letters have to much / not enough space after them, for instance with Times New Roman with font size 10 the letter f has essentially no space after it so the next letter is almost written on top of the f. This only occurs once it is printed, on the computer screen it looks perfect, but coming out of the printer... not so fine.
Now if I take this exact code and change the jre1.5.0_07 to j2re1.4.0_01 (in the call from the batch file which calls all the jars) the page that gets printed off looks perfect again, however I need to make it look perfect using the new java.
I'm not sure if this makes any sense or even if it is under the right topic, I can't say I'm a java expert.
Any help would be very greatly appreciated,
Thank You,
Dale Connor

One other thing,
With the newer java runtime I can see where where I have selected in the text box that is getting printed (I can see the | indicating where I would be typing if i hit keys). Again this does not appear in the old java runtime

Why don't TypeKit Fonts work with Edge Inspect

I have a Typekit kit setup with localhost added to its allowed domains and all mobile options checked. Running the site locally on http://localhost:4567/ works fine. The fonts load and display correctly.
However, when I connect an iPhone 4, 4s or iPad 2 using Edge Connect, the fonts do not load.
How should I troubleshoot this? I've found technical note suggesting that republishing the kit should solve it, but it does not and it is a new kit anyway.
I have tried adding the specific port to the allowed domains for the kit - /localhost:4567, but this has no effect.

Hi,
Yes. You're in luck. Had a couple of very helpful people from Adobe support look into it and here is their final response in full:
TLDR: It won't work out the box but there are good workarounds.
When you're browsing a local website via the hostname `localhost`, which would not be accessible to any other devices on your network, Edge Inspect automatically gets your machine's local IP address (which is not the same as the external IP as shown on sites like whatismyip.com) and sends that to the mobile apps. For instance, let's say I have a Sinatra application running in Chrome on my Mac as http://localhost:4567. My iPhone wouldn't be able to understand the hostname "localhost", but it can see my Mac using its IP address 10.1.10.1, so Edge Inspect will navigate to http://10.1.10.1:4567.
So, to get fonts working, you could add both `localhost` and `10.1.10.1` to your kit. However, we don't recommend adding local IPs to kits because they tend to change without warning. (In my example above, the next time I turn on my computer its IP could have changed to 10.1.10.2, but all I would know is that fonts had stopped working on my devices again.)
To work around this, we recommend using some form of "dynamic DNS" — basically, a domain name that is automatically updated with your current IP and therefore will always point to your computer.
If you're using a Mac, the simplest thing would be to use your Mac's Bonjour hostname. Bonjour is a technology built into Mac OS X and iOS to help devices find each other automatically over networks.
To find your Bonjour hostname:
1. Open System Preferences on your Mac.
2. Choose the Sharing icon.
3. Your Bonjour hostname will be displayed in the top area, under the "Computer Name" field.
You can add the hostname that appears there to your kit, and use it on any Apple device on your network. For example, my Bonjour name is Davids-rMBP.local, so I can browse to http://Davids-rMBP.local:4567 on any Mac or iOS device and see my Sinatra app.
Unfortunately, this simple solution will only work on Apple devices or Windows PCs with Apple's Bonjour software installed — you can't use this hostname with Android phones or tablets. If you need a hostname that will work on any device, there are a couple of options I'd recommend:
1. A third-party service called Forward offers a way to easily forward ports from your computer to other devices anywhere on the internet. You can learn more about them and sign up for a 30-day trial here: https://forwardhq.com. Forward will give you a permanent domain name for your forwarded app that you can add to your kit, such as `dev-yourcompany.fwd.wf`.
2. 37signals has a free "wildcard DNS" service called xip.io that will automatically forward traffic to a local IP address. You can get your current local IP address by opening System Preferences, then choosing Network. The IP address should be shown in the small text underneath the connection status for whatever connection is active (i.e. has a green dot next to it). Once you have the IP, you can access your computer at [YOUR IP].xip.io. To get fonts working, add *.xip.io to your kit. Remember that your IP may change, so if your site stops being accessible you should check to make sure you have the correct IP address.
I personally use xip.io if I need to test Typekit on multiple devices using Edge Inspect. It's certainly not the easiest option to use, but it works quite well with almost no setup and it's free.

[SOLVED] Picasa menu font - looks bad!!!

Some time ago I worte about problem with picasa-beta (AUR) and xorg-server on my 64bit arch install.
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=60162
So I reinstall my system, and now it's 32bit. Of course picasa still looks like shit.
Main window, after first start:
Picasa-beta:
Could you help me to solve the problem. I don't want to alsways downgrade my xorg-server to older version.
Last edited by dziq (2009-01-27 13:52:07)

cdwillis wrote:I think it's a problem with Nvidia drivers and Wine. I never could find a workaround for getting the fonts to display correctly, but I really didn't put a lot of effort into it.
I confim! The problem is nvidia-96xx driver. When I've installed nouveau driver instead everything seems to be ok. But this driver isn't as good as nvidia.
There is another way to fix up font. Just upgrade nvidia-96xx and nvidia-96xx-utils to 96.43.10-2 version by modyfing PKGBUILD's.
Last edited by dziq (2009-01-29 10:46:21)

Font looks bad when typing on russian language

on my win8 when i typing on russian i see below:
fonts for Edge Code not support Cyrillic?

Hi Mosharvos,
Unfortunately the font we use, Source Code Pro, doesn't support Cyrillic currently. But we're talking to the font team about getting it supported. I don't have an ETA on that, but will try to report back to this post when I have something.
If you have any questions, let me know.
=Ryan
[email protected]

Fonts look bad in safari how to fix it

Hey all, just moved up to Lion and not happy with the way text looks on webpages in Safari. It looks skinny and small. Very difficult to read, it's giving me a headache.
Is there any way to fix it so it looks good like it did in Snow Leopard?

Try clearing the browser cache and reset. Quit and relaunch the browser.
If no different try a SafeBoot and restart as normal.

Fonts look dull when published

I recently published my website to my new server. The font colors are extremely dull.. the contrast seems to be off. Even when just using white text on black background, the white text within iWeb is nice and crisp, but looks very dull, sort of photocopied-like when viewed in Firefox or Safari. Photos and jpegs in general seem to be okay. Anyone have similar issues? Thanks.
-Scott

No, there are no publishing problems. I agree with star-fish on dark backgrounds and light text. At least for these old eyes that is a terrible combination, hard on the eyes causing eye strain. I do realize, however, that I'm no longer the target audience for most of what's out there these days except perhaps for Depends, denture adhesives, etc.
I've found that for dark backgrounds fonts like Times New Roman snap out better than those like Arial, sans serf. You might experiment with different font as well as different boldness, etc.
OT

Fonts look distorted after publishing site

Can someone tell me if this is bug on EDGE ANIMATE?
The following link have an edge animation using fonts Poiret-one, sans-serif for some reason on google chrome they look distorted
the ones on the bottom are from adobe muse they look better but still not like they show on screen.
I have tried several different fonts and same issue, thanks
http://edgepoolsfonts.businesscatalyst.com/index.html

Looks all good here on a Mac using Chrome

Why font in Pages looks bad?

With the same size and same font, why the way the fonts look in Pages compared to Office Word or even TextEdit, looks kinda crappy and not as smooth as Office Word and TextEdit will display?
How to make it look smooth? It actually doesn't that important for printing, but I'm annoyed with the way it looks.

The way fonts are rendered is simply different. The reasons why it is different are not known with certainty. There are some guesses, but they are fairly complicated and technical.
And no, there is no way around it, except to change screen. Some users perceive no problems and other users perceive problems. Partly the difference may be in our brains, how we perceive small pixels, but it is also in the screen you are using.

Typekit fonts availability

Hi, I just downloaded Adobe Muse final version and updated the website I've been working on in which I've been integrating Typekit fonts manually… Exciting move forward and ability to use my fonts easily!
BUT THEN I couldn't find my fonts in the menu! Are all Typekit fonts supposed to be available in Muse?
I have a Portfolio plan and the fonts I need to use are Proxima Nova Alt and Brandon Grotesque.
Thanks for helping me with that, can't wait to see everything fit into place!
EDIT: Here's Typekit answer to this. (HINT: bad news)
Currently Muse only has the free and open-source Typekit fonts available in it. In the future there will be kit integration, so that you have access to all the fonts in your Typekit plan.
Maybe someone from Adobe could tell me how long we have to wait for that…

Dani - thank you again for your quick and clear responses to my not always clear questions - You have been correct in all your assumptions.
Also I'd like to say you strike the perfect balance between representing Adobe and seeing it from the customers view - not just in your responses here but in your Jam sessions and demos.
New Question 1: If I download and pay for Proxima from a paid font library (or any matching desktop version to its typekit brother), can I use this desktop version in Muse for the 'design' phase. Then implement the museinsider.com work-around at publish stage to give me a WYSIWYG experience?
Am i right in assuming they'd need to be opentype or true type? Assume postscript won't work in Muse?
New Question 2): Yeah excited by the Max announcement of accompanying desktop versions. It quite literally took the request and absolute glaring need out my mouth/keyboard. I realise it is not due for release til June and details may be vague but do you have any knowledge whether this would likely be just the free typekit fonts or include some edge/paid fonts? If Adobe include edge fonts/aka paid - or atleast discount - to CC members, this would be a truly truly significant benefit to being a CC subscriber, and surely convert traditional adobe subscribers to CC members!?
Just response to previous:
(don't feel obliged to repsond specifically to this! ;-)
Have to say I was confused with the free and paid reference.
Thanks for the Edge being aka paid tip too. As a Creative Cloud member paid seemed not to apply to me because I get the portfolio typekit pack as part of my CC membership at no extra cost. As Typekit is now owned by Adobe - I, I think quite understably, assumed they would simply be available to me in the same way the free fonts are. No need to explain here - I am not having a go at you at all I 'feel your pain' in replying to the same problem - and understand their are technical and legal reasons. With over 15 years in the industry I really do know (and feel the pain of) font legalities. However in light this original post was a year ago it does feel a bit irksome.
I realise in the aquisition or merging of a company there is a pain barrier - but as a customer I don't want to feel that pain!
Adobe please throw your weight money and effort at this. If you see the Adobe logo on a product you expect an intergrated experience. As it currently stands it is a serious draw back to its core market: professional designers who have previously mocked up in Indesign, Illustrator Photoshop and passed to a developer.
Oh no. I've become one of those people that moan on forums! Sorry. It's becuase I really care about this and am speaking to someone who can hopefully make a difference or atleast voice this serious need.
I am super excited by Adobe's developments, have been to a few seminars and am a champion of Adobe products I really see Muse as a very serious solution to some web projects for non coding designers, which is why I have taken the time - unusually for me - to blither on here!
Thank you for the Adobe Edge Fonts Preview page tip also.
Rich

Why do many Typekit fonts look bad on publish of Muse website?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for