[ubuntu-studio-devel] Considerations from a video and photo editing perspective.

[Hank Stanglow]

On 05/17/2018 08:28 AM, Len Ovens wrote:
> On Wed, 16 May 2018, argumento wrote:
>> Also, I hate how ubuntu studio comes with a bunch of low quality free 
>> fonts, it makes it awkward to browse your font catalog. Maybe having 
>> less, but better fonts could help Ubuntu Studio be a better tool 
>> (anyway, anyone can get as many fonts as they want from dafont or 
>> -better- sites like Squirrel Font or Open Font, so less fonts might 
>> be a good way to go).
> This I agree with even though I rarely do art or even formal text 
> projects which need fonts. However, the few times I have used 
> different fonts, I have fount it difficult to find anything. I have 
> also stumbled on a lot that didn't look very nice. The idea of 
> including lots of fonts was 12.*-ish as I recall.
The fonts was one of my complaints a few years ago and UbuntuStudio has 
greatly improved in this area. Most of the bad/redundant fonts come from 
Ubuntu. For example, on a fresh installation the family "Noto" takes up 
over a quarter of Inkscape's font selection tool -- there are like 60 
variants or something ridiculous. I understand the logic behind Ubuntu's 
choice to include several sans-serif fonts that are all pretty much the 
same, but I wish I didn't have to uninstall a dozen font packages 
whenever I do a fresh OS install.