Why does Arial not embed by default in Acrobat?

[jpfulton248]

EDIT: Just realized my title is actually incorrect. Some profiles have "Never Embed" fonts by default, other profiles embed all fonts.

I have no understanding of font embedding etc except that preflight will warn if fonts are not embedded. Why would I not want to embed ALL fonts for printing. Seems like Distiller shouldn't even have an option to omit certain fonts from embedding. What am I missing.

 

[prepressdork]

Hi jp,

You are correct in that some PDF profiles will not embed fonts while others will. There are two types of font embedding: 'embedded subset' and 'embedded'. For each font used, embedded subset embeds only the glyphs used while embedded embeds all glyphs. As for the fonts themselves, there are fonts out there that have embedding restrictions coded into them by their author. I have seen embedding restrictions only with TrueType fonts. I am not sure if embedding restrictions exist for Type 1, OpenType, etc. Arial is notorious for having embedding restrictions in them.

As for Distiller, I believe it does have an option for not embedding certain fonts. I haven't used Distiller in a long time as I export PDF files directly from apps like InDesign and Illustrator.

Hope this helps some,
pd

 

[Dov Isaacs]

I have no understanding of font embedding etc except that preflight will warn if fonts are not embedded. Why would I not want to embed ALL fonts for printing. Seems like Distiller shouldn't even have an option to omit certain fonts from embedding. What am I missing.

You are not “missing” anything.

Historically, one of the selling points of PDF was that the resultant files were exceptionally compact while maintaining visual fidelity with the original content.

One but not the only means of achieving this compactness was by allowing the PDF file creator to not embed some or all fonts. PostScript's Type 1 Multiple Master font technology was used to provide for “substitution fonts” mimicking the original fonts' metrics (although not design) when the PDF file reader didn't have the required fonts if the fonts were not embedded in the PDF file. The assumption was that everyone had the base fonts (four faces each of Times, Helvetica, and Courier plus Symbol and ITC Zapf Dingbats) installed on their system. Early versions of Acrobat and Reader in fact did install these fonts in its own private directory. Subsequently, it was assumed that everyone on standard platforms (Windows and MacOS) had at least “work alike” fonts to those base fonts and as such, Acrobat and Reader only installed a few uber substitution fonts plus AdobePi (a work-alike font for ITC Zapf Dingbats). For the common .joboptions files except for High Quality Print, Press Quality, and PDF/X, there is a list of common so-called “system fonts” that are not embedded (including fonts in the Verdana, Georgia, Tahoma, Trebouchet, Times New Roman, Courier New, and Arial families). Ironically, this list has not been updated in many years and is fairly obsolete in terms of the default OS fonts.

Given the history of PDF and its use/misuse and problems over the years, if I had to do it all over again, there would not be the concept of not embedding fonts in a PDF file. Any PDF file that simply references fonts that may or may not be installed on the recipient's system, printer, or RIP is a potential problem. That is exactly why all the ISO subset PDF standards including PDF/X, PDF/A, PDF/UA, and PDF/E all require that all fonts be embedded.

- Dov

 

[Greg_Firestone]

Hi JP,

One thought could be file size and online viewing. We tend to think of PDF as a print only format, but it's used in many market segments in its digital form. Fonts can add to the file size of a document. Now there's also the base 13/14 fonts (I say base 13/14 because it was originally the base 13 and then a extra font was added for PDF). The base 13/14 fonts are included on Postscript devices and Acrobat usually installs them for viewing files within Acrobat. For fonts outside of the base 13/14, they would need to be embedded for printing.

Regards,
Greg

Added - Read Dov's response... were were typing at the same time and he elaborated a bit more on items I mentioned.

 

[jpfulton248]

Thank you for your help guys. This certainly answers my question. I kind of wondered if filesize was a big motivation for embedding/not embedding in the early days. Sounds like it was.

Dov Isaacs I've seen you on various forums before helping people on various prepress related issues so first a quick thanks. I'm pretty sure you've commented on a few of my posts before. Second, your comment "if I had to do it all over again..." has me rather curious. I know you've had a long long history at Adobe... were you actually involved in the early days of creating Acrobat/Distiller?

 

[Dov Isaacs]

Thank you for your help guys. This certainly answers my question. I kind of wondered if filesize was a big motivation for embedding/not embedding in the early days. Sounds like it was.

Dov Isaacs I've seen you on various forums before helping people on various prepress related issues so first a quick thanks. I'm pretty sure you've commented on a few of my posts before. Second, your comment "if I had to do it all over again..." has me rather curious. I know you've had a long long history at Adobe... were you actually involved in the early days of creating Acrobat/Distiller?

I've now been at Adobe over 26 years!

I was not part of actual Acrobat organization until a few years ago, but I was involved with Acrobat, PDF workflows, and printing since the beginning of the Carousel project (the original internal name for the Acrobat project) in any number of ways, often providing input into issues associated with print and real-world PDF workflow. I did serve as the internal “spiritual venture capitalist” behind the Adobe PDF Print Engine technology which provided Adobe with PDF-based RIP technology as opposed to converting PDF to PostScript and then RIPing that!

- Dov