# [OS X TeX] Minion Pro and Bickham Pro

Wed Apr 25 00:42:00 CEST 2012

On Apr 14, 2012, at 10:49 PM, Michael Sharpe wrote:

>
> On Apr 14, 2012, at 8:13 PM, Richard Seguin wrote:
>
>> Has anyone used the Bickham Pro script font together with Minion Pro and MnSymbol? I'm wondering how compatible they are in weight. Bickham comes in regular, semibold, and bold versions at a cost of $35 per version. I'm guessing that the regular weight would be the most appropriate. At the moment I don't think I have use for the bold versions. Is installing the regular version only compatible with the mathalpha package? I'm tempted to try this for$35. Of course, if I do I'm sure there will be more installation questions ...
>>
>> Richard Séguin
>>
>>
>> ----------- Please Consult the Following Before Posting -----------
>> TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
>> List Reminders and Etiquette: http://email.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/
>> List Archive: http://tug.org/pipermail/macostex-archives/
>> TeX on Mac OS X Website: http://mactex-wiki.tug.org/
>> List Info: http://email.esm.psu.edu/mailman/listinfo/macosx-tex
>>
>>
>>
>
> Bickham Script regular is on the light side for use with MinionPro/MnSymbol.
>
> For example, the following file:
>
> \documentclass[11pt]{article}
> %SetFonts
> % Minion Pro+MnSymbol
> \usepackage[lf]{MinionPro}%has its own math, no amssymb should be loaded
> \usepackage[cal=bickham,calscaled=.93]{mathalfa}
> %SetFonts
> \begin{document}
> This short fragment of mathematical nonsense uses Minion Pro as text font, MnSymbol as math font and Bickham Script as math calligraphic alphabet. For all $A\in \mathcal{A}/\mathcal{I}$,
> $\mathcal{X}=\{f+g\mid g\in A^\perp\}\oplus\mathcal{F}_t.$
> \end{document}
>
> gives as output
>
> <bick00.pdf>
>
> The mathalfa package doesn't require that you possess all three weights of Bickham Pro---just the one you call. It may be that semibold is a better match to Minion Pro. To make that permanent, you could change the piece of ubickham.fd from
>
> \DeclareFontShape{U}{bickham}{m}{n}{
>   <-> \bickham@@scale  bickham-r
>
> to
>
> \DeclareFontShape{U}{bickham}{m}{n}{
>   <-> \bickham@@scale  bickham-s
>
> and use, instead of mathalfa,
>
> \usepackage[scaled=.93]{bickham}
>
> Michael
>

Michael,

It turns out that there is a bickham-r but no bickham-s. There is however an rbickham-s and an rbickhamo-s. I'm not sure what the difference between these is.

Also, it appears that \use{bickham} defines bickham as a \cal font. I'm already using the swash capitals as \cal in the MinionPro package and have been using the script fonts for \scr. Would I have to manually define bickham as a math \cal font? I take it that mathalpha is not set up to access the semibold version of bickham.

Richard

Richard