I’d like to do this since I’ve drawn a regular, and an ultrabold, but at around bold/semibold I need to change some glyphs (due to contrast)… how can I do this?
File / Generate Instances
Did you see this: http://www.glyphsapp.com/tutorials/alternating-glyph-shapes/
This is specifically made to adjust some glyphs without the need of an extra master.
Thanks, I know about the alternating glyphs shapes, however it’s not so easy to draw a glyph among others and test in text, since previewing an instance only works at the bottom preview pane. The generate instance is exactly what I need.
But generating an instance has the disadvantage of a complete intermediate master. Try this maybe: http://www.glyphsapp.com/tutorials/alternating-glyph-shapes-with-multiple-axes
You can use this trick to just draw a variation of one glyph for one instance.
I’m running into complications now:
I have 3 masters (Light, Regular, Bold) but for some characters I need more, i.e. /S /s, I would like to add another master between Regular and Bold, but I don’t want to add the whole master as a font.
The bracket trick isn’t really optimal since what I end up doing is this, i.e. If I have the following masters instances:
36–Light, 48, 64, 80–Regular, 110, 140, 170, 200, 230–Bold
Now I want to add a new master at 140. I drew what I want at 140, then extrapolate between 80 to 140, to get a new 230’, then set that new extrapolated 230’ as the new Bold, I then set the original 230 as a bracket “Bold ”, so that between 80 and 170 it will use the extrapolated 230’ which is now at Bold, to create what I want. This is obviously overly complicated… Furthermore it doesn’t create a true interpolation between 140 and interpolated 230’. It creates the instances for 140, 170, 200 for what would exist between 80 and original 230. (Sorry if this is not clear.)
What’s a better solution? http://www.glyphsapp.com/tutorials/alternating-glyph-shapes-with-multiple-axes Doesn’t seem make this problem any easier.
Very Hard to say without seeing your design.
I also think it would be great to have masters that do not cover the whole glyph set. If I want to draw a glyph for an intermediate weight exactly like I think it should look like then there is no way of using that shape for the interpolation of other weights.
As an Example, I would like to draw:
· Extralight complete glyph set
· Extrabold complete glyph set
· Regular only a few glyphs
… and then use the drawn Regular characters for the generation of the Light, Semibold and Bold.
Seems impossible to simulate right now, even with the bracket trick (which doesn’t interpolate after the cut-off).
Seems like a common problem, no?
But that is exactly what those two tricks are for. What do you mean by ‘after the cut-off’?
If I could draw a Regular directly then the correction contained within could be interpolated, i.e. also affect the Semibold and Bold, leading to correct e bars throughout the range of interpolations.
I must be getting something wrong. You can exchange your masters anywhere along the axis. If you want it for heavier instances too, you can use a higher number instead of 70.
What I do in cases like this:
Bold Master with thick stroke
Bold  Master with thin stroke
Or, because it can be confusing to keep track of bracket layers:
Two glyphs: e and e.bold, and a ‘Rename glyphs: e.bold=e’ custom parameter in the bolder instances.
I have a few scripts that generate the parameter in the right instances. Currently, they are too specific (just for a certain font project), so I guess I’ll rewrite and publish them one of these days.
I do understand the wish to draw an intermediate Regular master for single glyphs, though. For the other glyphs that should interpolate between Light and Bold masters, one (probably me) could write a script that would interpolate a list of glyphs in the intermediate master, because they cannot be empty. That could address the initial problem of the thread.
No, the whole point of interpolation is not to switch but to blend. This simply gives better results.
If I set the value higher to include the Bold it will be too heavy, if I do not include the Bold it will be too light. What we need is interpolation between the Extrabold and the Regular, and no bracket trick can simulate this.You mean, one that I need to re-run every time after modifying the Light or Extrabold? I really try to avoid these kinds of things, and this was always something I hated about FL: automatisms that you have to re-update manually. What I like about Glpyhs is true automatisms I can set up and then they just work, so please let's not go that wrong route again.
Now I am really confused, because, as I read it, this…... is in contradiction to this: Changing something in the calculated instance implies switching. Blending implies blending, and changes many instances.
And I disagree that blending always gives better results. While this may be the case sometimes, in my experience, I usually find to have more control over the interpolated shapes when I switch masters.I'd say: Depends on how you draw the bracket layer(s). But my guess is that I do not quite understand what you want exactly. Can you send me an example glyph, so I can see what you mean?
As I understand it, the request is not so confusing if you don’t cling to words.
Let’s say you have two masters light and xbold which interpolate fine for most glyphs but some exceptions. Then you could create a regular master in which you only draw the critical glyphs, e.g. the letter e.
Interpolation should then simply respect the regular master for the intepolation of the e and intepolate between light and xbold for all other glyphs.
This would be straightforward from a users perspective without confusing bracket tricks.
Switching masters with the bracket trick is fine however if you change the letter form as in the Dollar example.
Rainer, why is this so difficult to understand? If I draw the Extralight and Extrabold then all interpolations will have too light an e bar, so the bracket trick will not work. If I use a corrected Regular then all interpolations will be correct.
Georg SeifertI see in Version 2.0.0 (635), it has this update, is this relevant?? And how should one use it?