[NTG-pdftex] Using CFF (Type 1C) instead of Type 1 fonts

Markus Kuhn Markus.Kuhn at cl.cam.ac.uk
Mon Dec 18 16:42:15 CET 2017


PDFs produced by pdftex can shrink significantly in size
when processed through ghostscript's pdfwrite driver.

I understand a main reason for that is that ghostscript
converts any Type 1 fonts that it finds into CFF (aka Type 1C)
fonts.

I also understand that

  - Type 1 fonts are eexec-encrypted, and such ciphertext cannot
    benefit from PDF's (de)flate compression.

  - CFF fonts, on the other hand, are a compacter plain-text
    format and compress well.

  - CFF fonts are also compatible with Type1, i.e. it
    is possible to convert any Type 1 font into a CFF font
    without loss of information.

Is all of this correct? If so, isn't the continued use of
Type 1 fonts in the TeX ecosystem an anachronism?

Shouldn't TeXLive ship instead CFF/Type 1C versions of the
BlueSky Computer Modern fonts and shouldn't tools like pdftex
switch to using them directly?

Has someone looked into what would be involved with a Type 1
to CFF migration for pdftex?

It seems at the moment, pdftex is actually replacing any
Type 1C glyphs that it finds in a PDF file embedded with
\pdfximage with the much less space-efficient Type 1 glyphs
that it find in its font map files.

Has there been any progress on this since:

   https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/38145/why-does-pdflatex-produce-bigger-output-files-than-latexdvipdfm

?

Markus

-- 
Markus Kuhn, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/ || CB3 0FD, Great Britain


More information about the ntg-pdftex mailing list