Embedded font problem
We recently began including, in our installation application, code to install Roboto Mono and Roboto Mono Bold fonts. We received complaints that documents generated by our app and viewed on computers without these fonts produced messages about the missing fonts, so we decided to embed the fonts in our PDF output using the embed option in the Fast Reports PDF export.
Now we have examples of files generated by our app by user1 and by user2. Both have the fonts embedded in their PDF output, yet when user3 (without either of these fonts installed) views the output from user1, user3 sees Roboto Mono where Roboto Mono Bold is expected. When user3 views the output from user2, user3 sees Roboto Mono Bold where it is expected.
An examination of the document properties of both files shows that both fonts were embedded in both files.
Can anyone suggest a cause for these differences?
Comments
G'day,
Not a suggestion, but a couple of questions.
Are the devices used by User1, User2 and User3 all running the same sofware and versions of same (e.g.Windows 11 and Adobe Acrobat)?
Are the settings in the "PDF VIewer" software identical?
So basically my starting point is: what is (are) the difference(s)?
Cheers, Paul
AFAIK, all devices are running the same versions of Win 11 and Adobe Acrobat. In fact, I also replicated these results with Edge, Chrome, and FireFox. I could not find any relevant differences in the software settings between the machines.
If user2 turns off font embedding, the report is displayed correctly.
I did google searches for display differences caused by embedded fonts outside of Fast Reports and produced nothing. That's why I suspected that there might be a problem with Fast Report's implementation of font embedding. Further, by using a PDF comparison app, I see user1 running my application using Fast Report to generate my report shows Roboto Mono Bold Italic used for the column headers, whereas user2 shows Roboto Mono Bold (no italics). Same executable, different font. I've checked my design screen a dozen times; I never specified italics.
Might there be a system setting that overrides italics/no italics on embedded fonts?
OK, so the next questions relate to the contents of the "C:\Windows\Fonts" Folders on the machines of User1, User2 et al.
The screen-clip below is from one of our machines showing a grab from Windows Explorer showing our instance of the "Roboto" Font. (We don't have "Roboto Mono".) You might have to download the screen-clip to zoom-in to make it clear.
The two areas that are worth comparing are the Properties listed in "Font Style" and the "Font Embeddability".
I was intrigued by your comments about the "Italic" differences, so I am doing a bit of digging with one of our Test Apps to try to reproduce your issue...
Cheers, Paul
It appears that I had Roboto Mono Bold Italic installed, but not Roboto Mono Bold, so the code was using the using the next best font when it discovered that I didn't have Roboto Mono Bold. I still don't know how that happened....
Even stranger, how did it embed Roboto Mono Bold when I didn't have it installed?
We're currently looking at PDF-A2, which embeds by default, as a workaround.
At any rate, you have been an immense help as always! Thank you very much!
No worries! Glad it is sorted!!
Cheers, Paul
We have a fix.
My "italic" difference was because, although I did not have Roboto Mono Bold installed, I did have Roboto Mono Bold Italic installed. The system used the closest font it had.
So, my fix was to use PDF/A-2A (which I understand embeds by default) and ensure that I am using static (not variable) fonts. Hope this information proves useful to others!
Thanks for the update.
I have bookmarked this in case we ever have a similar issue!