Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About martober

  • Rank
    MoGraph Regular

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    London Town
  1. martober

    panties and bras

    I am bumping this thread to demonstrate that we did a Mograph rap 5 years before these people.
  2. No, you have misunderstood, sorry. You buy it once, exactly like Photoshop, not 3 times or whatever. You got that bit right. I am not an expert on this but this is how I understand it (at least in the UK). You never own a font. You simply buy a license to use it. You pay and agree to be bound by the license terms in exchange for use of the font. The agreement limits the location of the fonts use. Commonly a license covers one computer at one location. You could perhaps move a font around your office uninstalling and reinstalling as you go. However duplicating it and using it at the same time on two machines may contravene the license agreement. Copying it to another location will certainly be against the agreement. Just like driving a car with no license and telling the cops your friend James back at home has one so you thought it would be OK.
  3. It shouldn't matter to you if they are buying licenses or not. It is you that needs to have a license if you are the one that's using it.
  4. I think this is good. Have a gold star. The DRM thing is plausible. Any other ideas for excuses?
  5. yo bumrush the show

  6. If you email a PSD file to your client and he can't open it, what do you do? Ask them to find a machine that has Photoshop installed in their organisation or zip up the CS4 installer with a crack and buzz it over on yousend it? Of course you don't because it's software, that's illegal and unethical. Commercial fonts are licensed software. It's not weird, that how it is. Rights-managed footage and photos are charged according to how far and wide you want to display the image to the public. The stock libary don't really care how many people are working on an image before it is published. Fonts are software and you get charged according to how many people need to operate that software at any given time. I think the current system is value for money. You pay once per machine and you have the rights indefinately. Imagine if you had to pay according to the scope of usage Helvetica was going to get over the years after you bought it! NBC will probably settle out of court or risk having to recall and remake all the material that contains the fonts in question. Ha! Do you work at NBC? Well this is perhaps a different way of looking at things to the way font companies see it. They might expect you to buy the Helvetica Neue family in say, 1996 and have it still serve you very well today. This would be after 10 versions of Photoshop have come and gone. A typeface from Interstate for example costs $40. Even if you buy it for one project and throw it away. Is that cost too high? It is probably the only thing in a normal week that you would buy that another designer. Why not help him towards his next font? Would you really? Is that a better way to make money? Even without going to court I think the companies do fairly good business from their honest customers. The small issue of quality. A knock-off is a knock-off right? Be it a Gucci bag or a fake leather jacket. NBC chose the fonts they did due to their pedigree, history of development and their robustness of engineering both visual and technical. There are already lots of knock-off fonts, they are called free fonts. A business that is hard to compete with. Consumers are going to continue to enjoying illegal downloads of music. Selling music to individuals as a business is at the end of the line, it's true. But I don't hear a lot about advertisers and broadcasters trying to secretly use the latest Black Eyed Peas on a spot without licensing it from Universal. It has been easy to distribute the tiny font files for years even before the internet just like MP3s. However, fonts are software that are used to communicate and market things in public by money making companies. Because of that I think the font companies are going to be OK. My message is, if you are working and making money, support your fellow designer by buying the font each time.
  7. How many of you get calls saying "Bob at edit company X hasn't got font Y, can you email it over?" How many of you say yes? Or do you suggest they buy the font - even if the pressure is on?
  8. Looks great! Two years after starting this thread we have found our first fixed wheel bike rider. There must be more?
  9. Wow. My thread has come back alive again!
  10. The guy sounds like Goldie Lookin Chain, which is not a bad thing.
  11. So long as you enjoyed making it I think it is fine.
  12. I have been using Brian Eno's Oblique Strategies all week. These are the first 5 cards I pulled out: Use an old idea Use filters Do something boring Ask people to work against their better judgement Go outside. Shut the door. I'll post up the work I have created later and you can tell me if I should continue.
  13. Rathergood.com has a design aesthetic that is charming in its naivety. The animation was also very fresh at the time it first came out. 4mations.tv seems to have made an attempt at an 'undesigned' / naive look. Because the names Aardman and Channel 4 are associated with the site, what I and others see as 'bad' design doesn't really have the right impact. This is due to the high quality we would normally expect of such names. All these cut out kitten heads and such don't feel original anymore either.
  14. Open Type. It's a wonderful thing. Until you need to use an OT font on an old machine that doesn't wanna talk that way. Can you recommend from experience any software that can convert an Open Type font to True Type? There is TransType by Font Lab but I can't find confirmation that it will do it. Thank you mograph user.
  15. Some more details here. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/jul/03/channel4.kubrick Anyone know who did the post production?
  • Create New...