

Google Font Directory - albertzeyer
https://code.google.com/webfonts

======
shortformblog
Why haven't they gotten the League of Moveable Type on board here?

<http://www.theleagueofmoveabletype.com/>

Seriously, Chunk Five and League Gothic would be some great additions to this
list.

~~~
jlees
We're reaching out to a number of open source font developers so I bet they
have been contacted. I'll inquire. I think the current priorities are
international language fonts actually, but other beautiful fonts are still
welcome.

~~~
shortformblog
Thanks for the insight; that clears up a lot.

------
sushi
Google Web Fonts or @font-face are great leap towards better web typography
but sadly that's not the only piece of puzzle that needs to be solved.

Every OS, and every browser on that OS renders text differently. Read this for
more on that: <http://24ways.org/2009/real-fonts-and-rendering>

I recently wrote a silly article, mainly to see how the typography will shape
the whole feel of the webpage at <http://www.sushaantu.com/moustache.html> It
looks awesome to me on my Ubuntu Chromium 7 but sucks on Firefox 3 of Windows
and OSX.

Google Font Directory is indeed a great thing to make web little more
beautiful but we need support from OS and browsers as well which are making
steady pace.

~~~
ugh
That looks great on OS X and Safari but the fake italics are just wrong. Don’t
know why you would say that it sucks.

– edit: Ah, that font doesn’t have a italic or bold variant, that explains it.
Now I don’t know what could possibly be wrong with the rendering in OS X.

~~~
sushi
I'm glad it doesn't suck on your browser :)

~~~
bradendouglass
I am rocking Chromium and it seems to render fine on mine as well. I do
however, agree that there needs to be some text rendering continuity between
browsers.

It really is a shame that maybe tops, 5 people are talking in this thread and
most of us are seeing different renders

------
listic
Artemy Lebedev on Google Font Directory:

"This is, unfortunately, total f--kup.

Alas, besides Apple, all consortiums and big companies totally lack font
culture. Microsoft is getting on a bit better - the fonts they ship are good
by themselves, - but all the same they f--k up ratserizing and typography in
the system.

To make sure of this, it takes only to open the same page on Mac, PC and some
Linux. The question will stand no longer.

Google traditionally had failed at design. Founders’ standard of ideas doesn’t
exceed American office aesthetics. Hence various holiday pictures, hence
shadow under the logo, hence given fonts. All of them are done by the standard
of free font collections and present samples of extremely low quality. Namely
student’s amateur crap.

Fonts are so horrible, that I just want to sit down, cover my face with my
hands and cry helplessly. As it will circulate million-strong, people will
think that you can do it like this. These fonts will be used.

(Cries)"

translation by me, original: Business Lynch, 24 May 2010
([http://www.artlebedev.ru/kovodstvo/business-
lynch/2010/05/24...](http://www.artlebedev.ru/kovodstvo/business-
lynch/2010/05/24/))

Artemy Lebedev is a founder and art director of the most prominent design
studio in Russia, known for their attention to typesetting.

Art.Lebedev Studio have on their site a running daily feature called Business
Lynch, where since September 2006 they do review and critique of one specimen
of design, submitted by the site's readers. Reviews are done in informal
manner and widely range in style.

~~~
jlees
That article's totally backwards. The rendering is nothing to do with Google
(unless you're viewing on Chrome :P). Microsoft has a fairly good font group
internally and has made some great progress.

Google is just getting started (I'm part of the fonts effort there) and there
are fairly respected designers involved in the whole effort. Without buying in
licenses it will take some time to reach a certain quality level but a lot of
the fonts provided are high quality and have received praise as such - the
quote implies they're all Wingdings :/

------
madh
Here's a handy flowchart of @font-face scenarios:
<http://typophile.com/node/70216>

------
trustfundbaby
I was a big fan when this was first announced, but the selection of fonts is
puny ... try typekit instead. <http://typekit.com/> ... there's a free plan.

------
mralbie
My favorite place for this kind of thing is font squirrel.

~~~
wwortiz
The advantage of this is that google provides the bandwidth, all they need is
more fonts for this to be useful.

------
heresy
Why are all the fonts on that page rendered so badly?

It's artifacts all the way down.

(Chrome 7 on Windows 7)

~~~
shortformblog
No offense, but because you're using Windows 7.

It's mentioned later in the thread, but this image explains everything:
<http://typophile.com/node/70216>

Short answer: Windows has always had crappy font rendering. (Though some
people like/prefer it for whatever reason. I'm not one of them.) It's going to
get better eventually – look at the image for IE9 and FF 3.7.

You may also want to be sure you have Cleartype on.

Maybe it's my own status as a Mac user, but it's almost distracting to see the
differences in font rendering between platforms.

~~~
shortformblog
To the person who downvoted me because I dared criticized Windows' font
rendering: That's not nice. :/

------
jbrun
These do not work in IE! I tried.

