When application performance is a must, D-Type fonts earn your trust.
If you are using D-Type Font Engine or D-Type PowerDoc Engine to render text, it makes sense to store your fonts in D-Type format. D-Type fonts are more versatile and more compact than existing commonly used font formats, such as TypeType, OpenType, Type 1 and even Adobe’s CFF (Compact Font Format). D-Type fonts can also provide an extra performance boost for your applications. Converting any existing scalable font format to D-Type format is straightforward when using D-Type Font Converter.
D-Type Font Converter is provided at no cost when you purchase a license for one of the following D-Type libraries:
D-Type font format is feature-rich. Every feature available in existing scalable font formats is also present in D-Type. However, the D-Type font format is more compact and more versatile than other font formats, making it an ideal choice for D-Type Font Engine.
| Feature | Font Format | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TrueType / OpenType | Type 1 | CFF | D-Type | |
| Compact file size | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Pure binary format | Yes | No | Mostly | Yes |
| Efficient to parse and process | Mostly | No | Mostly | Yes |
| No redundant data | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Clean design (e.g. no messy data structures) |
Mostly | No | Somewhat | Yes |
| Easily extensible | Yes but with trade-offs and caveats | No | Somewhat | Yes |
| Supports more than 256 glyphs in a single file | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| Supports Unicode | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| Supports advanced typography | Yes | No | No | Yes |
| All font data in a single file | Yes | No | No | Yes |
| Random access | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| Supports multiple fonts in a single file (i.e. font collections) |
Yes | No | No | Yes |
| Supports multiple-master (or variable) fonts | Statring with OpenType version 1.8 | Yes | Only CFF2 | Yes |
| Supports glyph hints or instructions | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Validator available | Yes | Not to our knowledge | Not to our knowledge | Yes |
In the following section, we demonstrate the compactness and efficiency of the D-Type font format. We compare the sizes of eight randomly selected fonts in TrueType, Type 1, and CFF (Compact Font Format) with D-Type. We also show the size of each font when compressed using a conventional ZIP compressor, illustrating the efficiency of each format. For example, if a 90 KB font file can be compressed to a 46 KB ZIP file, its efficiency is only about 51% (calculated as 100 * 46 / 90), which is not very high. Conversely, if a 90 KB font file can be compressed to an 85 KB ZIP file, its efficiency is approximately 94% (calculated as 100 * 85 / 90), indicating a high level of compactness. When efficiency is this high, little additional size reduction can be achieved through compression, meaning the font file is already highly compact. The tests we conducted show that fonts converted from TrueType/OpenType, Type 1, and CFF formats to D-Type are consistently extremely compact, with an average efficiency around 90%.
It is also noteworthy that the efficiency of TrueType/OpenType, likely the most commonly used format today, is relatively low, around 58%. More importantly, converting TrueType/OpenType fonts to D-Type can reduce their file size by nearly three times!
— Fin.
Premier cas : Léa, une podcasteuse brillante mais bloquée par le syndrome de la page blanche. Pascal l'accueillit, l'écouta raconter ses doutes, puis, sans juger, proposa un plan en trois étapes — retrouver sa voix, créer une routine d'enregistrement, et tester un format court chaque semaine. Ils simulèrent ensemble une intro en direct ; la caméra capta l'étincelle dans les yeux de Léa quand elle se réappropria son récit. Les viewers virent une ascension en temps réel : quelques nouveaux abonnés, un don de soutien, et surtout, une Léa qui respirait plus librement.
Quand l'émission toucha à sa fin, Pascal fit ce qu'il faisait toujours : il partagea un défi pour la semaine — produire trois contenus courts, inviter une personne inspirante, et noter ce qui les rendait fiers. Puis il dit merci, éteignit la lumière, mais la discussion continua ; le replay se mit à tourner, les créateurs appliquèrent les conseils, et la petite communauté se renforça. streaming pascal le grand frere pineur 3
Pineur 3 ne promettait pas des recettes miracles. Il offrait quelque chose de plus rare : du temps, de l'attention, et des outils pour que chacun puisse retrouver sa voix. Dans les semaines qui suivirent, on vit des croissances modestes mais durables — abonnés qui s'accrochaient pour la sincérité plus encore que pour la technique. Pascal rangea son mug, sourit dans le silence du studio, et sut que, pour ces créateurs-là, être grand frère n'était pas un titre, mais une présence.
Pascal avait appris à lire les flux comme d'autres lisent des cartes. Animateur hors pair, surnommé « Le Grand Frère » par ses abonnés, il lançait ce soir la troisième saison de Pineur, une émission en direct où il aidait des créateurs en détresse à redresser leur chaîne. La pression montait : Pineur 1 et 2 avaient fait le buzz, et les attentes étaient immenses. — Fin
Entre deux interventions, Pascal ouvrait la porte sur ses propres échecs : des mois passés à traquer la viralité et à oublier pourquoi il avait commencé. Il parla de fatigue, de l'algorithme qui promet et déçoit, et de la nécessité de poser des limites. Son honnêteté toucha beaucoup ; le taux d'engagement grimpa, non pas pour le spectacle, mais pour la connexion vraie.
La soirée commença par une entrée sobre — un cadre chaleureux, une tisane fumante posée près de lui, et la caméra réglée sur un angle qui rendait chaque mot plus intime. Le chat explosa dès que Pascal alluma le micro : demandes d'avis, confessions, et quelques habitués qui envoyaient des mèmes. Il sourit, fit un clin d’œil, et lança le fil rouge de la saison : "Authenticité ou algorithme ?" Ils simulèrent ensemble une intro en direct ;
Deuxième cas : le duo de gamers "Bot et Bob", dont les streams décrochaient malgré un gameplay solide. Pascal observa leurs interactions, dénoua les tensions avec une question simple : "Jouez-vous d'abord pour vous amuser ?" Il proposa de rééquilibrer leur émission — segments rigolos, défis improvisés, et un moment "fan-choice" où le public choisissait une règle farfelue. Le chat se mit à voter, le rire revint, et la métrique la plus importante, la cohérence, reprit du poil de la bête.
| Font Name | Type 1 Format | D-Type Format | D-Type Size Reduction (A / D) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A Original Size | B Zipped Size | C Efficiency (B / A * 100) |
D Original Size | E Zipped Size | F Efficiency (E / D * 100) |
||
| Helvetica 003.001 (hv______.pfb) |
32 KB | 31 KB | 97% | 16 KB | 15 KB | 94% | 2 |
| Antique Olive Roman 001.002 (aqr_____.pfb) |
31 KB | 29 KB | 93% | 16 KB | 15 KB | 94% | 1.9 |
| LucidaTypewriterEF-Bold 001.000 (ldbd____.pfb) |
56 KB | 52 KB | 92% | 26 KB | 24 KB | 92% | 2.2 |
| URW Chancery L Medium Italic 001.005 (z003034l.pfb) |
38 KB | 37 KB | 97% | 26 KB | 27 KB | 96% | 1.5 |
| URW Palladio L Roman 1.06 (p052003l.pfb) |
173 KB | 172 KB | 99% | 50 KB | 41 KB | 82% | 3.5 |
| URW Bookman L Light 1.06 (b018012l.pfb) |
138 KB | 137 KB | 99% | 52 KB | 45 KB | 86% | 2.7 |
| Nimbus Roman No9 L Medium 1.06 (n021004l.pfb) |
133 KB | 132 KB | 99% | 49 KB | 43 KB | 88% | 2.7 |
| Computer Modern 001.100 (cmmib5.pfb) |
34 KB | 31 KB | 91% | 20 KB | 19 KB | 95% | 1.7 |
| Average Efficiency and Overall Reduction | 96% | 91% | 2.3 | ||||
The efficiency of the Type 1 format is consistently high, averaging around 96%. In most cases, the original file size is very close to the compressed size. However, Type 1 fonts are limited to a maximum of 256 glyphs.
The efficiency of the D-Type format is also very high and consistent, averaging around 91% (about 5% less than Type 1). More importantly, D-Type fonts are not restricted to 256 glyphs.
On average, D-Type fonts are more than twice as small as their corresponding Type 1 files.
| Font Name | CFF Format | D-Type Format | D-Type Size Reduction (A / D) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A Original Size | B Zipped Size | C Efficiency (B / A * 100) |
D Original Size | E Zipped Size | F Efficiency (E / D * 100) |
||
| CMU Bright Roman (CMUBright-Roman.cff) |
184 KB | 97 KB | 52% | 111 KB | 101 KB | 91% | 1.6 |
| CMU Serif Upright Italic (CMUSerif-UprightItalic.cff) |
248 KB | 114 KB | 46% | 122 KB | 112 KB | 85% | 1.5 |
| ESL Gothic Unicode (ESLGothic.cff) |
40 KB | 21 KB | 52% | 27 KB | 23 KB | 92% | 1.5 |
| Kozuka Mincho Pro (Kozuka.cff) |
3,671 KB | 3,230 KB | 88% | 3,637 KB | 3,393 KB | 93% | 1.0 |
| Adobe Caslon Pro Bold (ACaslopPro-Bold.cff) |
113 KB | 95 KB | 84% | 102 KB | 99 KB | 97% | 1.1 |
| Adobe Arabic Regular (AdobeArabic-Regular.cff) |
103 KB | 77 KB | 75% | 98 KB | 83 KB | 85% | 1.1 |
| Nimbus Sans L Bold (FreeSansBold.cff) |
55 KB | 32 KB | 58% | 38 KB | 34 KB | 89% | 1.4 |
| AntykwaTorunska-Regular (AntykwaTorunska-Regular.cff) |
103 KB | 77 KB | 75% | 94 KB | 82 KB | 87% | 1.1 |
| Average Efficiency and Overall Reduction | 66% | 90% | 1.3 | ||||
The efficiency of the CFF format varies significantly, ranging from as low as 46% to as high as 88%.
The efficiency of the D-Type format remains consistently high, averaging around 90%. In some extreme cases, it approaches 97%, indicating that further size reduction using conventional ZIP compressors is generally not feasible.
On average, D-Type fonts are more than 1.3 times smaller than their corresponding CFF files.
Availability |
|
|---|---|
Application Interface |
Command Line Interface (CLI) |
Input Font Formats |
Any font format supported by D-Type Fony Engine |
Output Font Formats |
D-Type |
If you have a question about D-Type technology that you can’t find the answer to, please use our Obtain Additional Information form. We will publish your question along with our response within a few days and notify you once the answer is available on our website.
Additionally, you may find it helpful to explore the history of D-Type releases and review the D-Type News page.
Available in binary, object, and/or source code format for any hardware or operating system environment, D-Type technology is an excellent choice for software developers seeking a rendering solution that is affordable, mature, reliable, secure, well-maintained, well-supported, super-fast and packed with features.