Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!thelake!steve From: steve@thelake.mn.org (Steve Yelvington) Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: FAXable Fonts Message-ID: Date: 2 Apr 91 03:10:28 GMT References: <16600009@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com> <25321801@bfmny0.BFM.COM> Organization: St. Croix Valley C and Ski Lines: 27 [In article <25321801@bfmny0.BFM.COM>, tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff) writes ... ] > For what it's worth, I usually fax in about Helvetica 13. Serifs and > small x-heights tend to be hard to read if there's any significant > degradation of the fax image. There also seems to be a break point > somewhere between 12 and 13 points where the final document retains a > professional look. It depends on your recipients' tastes and on your > average transmission quality. We (my employer, actually) published a fax newspaper for awhile before it became obvious that it wasn't going to make any money. We had no trouble at all using Times Roman at 9.5. The bottleneck on fax quality is the scanning device, and since we weren't using one, even inexpensive fax machines were able to reproduce the paper without trouble. We generated faxable bitmaps using GammaScript (an OEM version of Ultrascript) from PostScript files created by Pagemaker. The bitmaps were transmitted directly by a fax board. Our competition typeset their fax edition, pasted it up, and fed it into a conventional fax machine. I think they were running 12pt Helv and their quality was significantly lower than ours. ---- Steve Yelvington / P. O. Box 38 / Marine on St. Croix, MN 55047 USA INTERNET: steve@thelake.mn.org UUCP: plains!umn-cs!thelake!steve GEnie: S.YELVINGTO2 Delphi: YELVINGTON