My Inkscape page is filled with text (I'm using several typefaces) inside textboxes of various sizes.
When I eventually save as (or export) the svg file to a PDF I know that I will need to either (1) convert all text to path, or (2) embed the fonts, so that the text/appearance is preserved.
I'm sure there are subtle (or not so subtle) nuances between both of these options. Is one of the two choices better than the other when preparing a PDF file for a commercial printer?
I'm leaning toward option (2) because for some reason I think that will make the file more stable and less likely to crash (so much text!) but I have no experience or knowledge to support my leaning toward option (2).
Would appreciate any info and/or a point in the direction of an article to read. Thank you.
If the text is converted to paths, the text will not be selectable/searchable, but you can be sure the correct shapes of letters and the fonts won't be substituted by any reading software.
Hi Tyler. I was under the impression that the typefaces would also have the also have the correct shapes/appearance is the fonts were embedded. Is this still true?
I don't necessarily need to keep the option option for text to be selectable or searchable. Although I can see the value in having that option available, especially in a PDF. I suppose that would be why an Inkscape user would choose text to path rather than embed for a PDF export?
I have seen readers (even Adobe) fail to respect the embedded fonts... so, conversion to paths assures the appearance, but lettering will not be searchable, copy/cut/paste, etc.
That is quite concerning that some readers (like Adobe!) fail to respect the embedded fonts. I would have never imagined that could happen so thank you so much for sharing that. Sounds like I should convert text to paths and make sure that I keep my native svg file in case I need to make any edits/changes after the conversion.
Beginners' Questions text to path versus embed fonts ?
Inkscape.org
Hi all.
My Inkscape page is filled with text (I'm using several typefaces) inside textboxes of various sizes.
When I eventually save as (or export) the svg file to a PDF I know that I will need to either (1) convert all text to path, or (2) embed the fonts, so that the text/appearance is preserved.
I'm sure there are subtle (or not so subtle) nuances between both of these options. Is one of the two choices better than the other when preparing a PDF file for a commercial printer?
I'm leaning toward option (2) because for some reason I think that will make the file more stable and less likely to crash (so much text!) but I have no experience or knowledge to support my leaning toward option (2).
Would appreciate any info and/or a point in the direction of an article to read. Thank you.
If the text is converted to paths, the text will not be selectable/searchable, but you can be sure the correct shapes of letters and the fonts won't be substituted by any reading software.
Hi Tyler. I was under the impression that the typefaces would also have the also have the correct shapes/appearance is the fonts were embedded. Is this still true?
I don't necessarily need to keep the option option for text to be selectable or searchable. Although I can see the value in having that option available, especially in a PDF. I suppose that would be why an Inkscape user would choose text to path rather than embed for a PDF export?
Yes.
I have seen readers (even Adobe) fail to respect the embedded fonts... so, conversion to paths assures the appearance, but lettering will not be searchable, copy/cut/paste, etc.
That is quite concerning that some readers (like Adobe!) fail to respect the embedded fonts. I would have never imagined that could happen so thank you so much for sharing that. Sounds like I should convert text to paths and make sure that I keep my native svg file in case I need to make any edits/changes after the conversion.
Thank you again.