Question about European Modern Roman Fonts

[Robin Fairbairns]

> On your website, you list for sale a series of European Modern Roman fonts:
> EMR5, EMR6, EMR7, EMR8, EMR9, EMR17, etc.  I had a couple questions because
> one can purchase them individually for $15 or as a set for $110.
>
> I am trying to write my doctoral thesis using Adobe Framemaker 7.0 on
> Windows XP.  While I have found the full Computer Modern Roman font family
> for free, the print quality is slightly poor and the spaces are represented
> by a dash.  Both of these characteristics are unacceptable.

this is because the cm* fonts were designed for use with the
typesetting program "tex", and they use a rather peculiar encoding
scheme.  the em* set also use a peculiar encoding scheme, but one that
is a good deal more in line with modern practice.  in particular, they
do *not* include a space character.

> So here are my questions:
>
> (1) The number at the end of the designation refers to the point size (i.e.,
> EMR12 is the European Modern Roman font, 12 point size).  Is that correct?

roughly speaking, yes.  it's exactly correct for 10- and 12-point, but
it's really intended only as a sort of guide.

> (2) My understanding is that Type 1 fonts are scalable without artifacts.
> So then why does Y and Y offer a series of point sizes (i.e., EMR5, EMR6,
> etc.)?  Can a person not just purchase one, say like EMR12, and scale up or
> down to other point sizes as needed?  If this is a stupid question, I
> apologize.  But I am new to this area.

the tex typesetting system and font technology predated the adobe
multiple-master font mechanism by about a decade.  yes, you are right
that all type 1 fonts are in principle scaleable, but their
proportions look silly at the extremes.  by having a range of sizes,
one can have a 5pt font look significantly different from a 17pt font,
thus avoiding the cluttering effect at the low end and spindliness at
the high end.  however, one could do as you propose: you would merely
not get the full value of the font range.

> (3) What do the other designations stand for?  For example, you have EMBX,
> EMBXSL, EMBXTI, EMTI, EMSL, EMSS, etc.  Are these just stylistic variations
> on the main European Modern Roman?

there are a series of characters tagged on the end of the "EM"
prefix: B=bold, X=extended, SL=oblique (slanted), TI=text italic (as
opposed to maths italic), SS=sans-serif, TT=typewriter (i.e., fixed-
pitch).  there's no particular rhyme or reason with this lot, but

> I am interested in purchasing an EMR font but am rather cost-sensitive.  My
> boss would not approve purchase of the full set but might allow an
> individual font purchase (or two).  Thank you for you time.

using the techniques you outline, you certainly _could_ get away with
a couple of fonts, but i wouldn't recommend it.  the EM set is a very
good example of tex font technology, but the fact remains that it _is_
tex font technology.  people have serious difficulty using tex fonts
with applications such as word, and so on.

i have never heard of anyone trying them with framemaker, but i see no
reason to doubt that it would require significant support from a font
manipulation expert who is fluent in using tex fonts.  such people do
exist, but we don't have them.

i would seriously recommend that you look elsewhere.  there are no
doubt "modern" fonts available in adobe standard form from other
suppliers.  i suggest you go to them.

Robin Fairbairns

Y&Y support team