Hi Guys i have to use a custom fonts in my web page for that i have generated css in "http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fontface/generator" but it throw "Error" message when i upload my .ttf fonts. As i guess shows that it blacklisted fonts.
Well, you need to make sure that the font's license specifically allows them to be used on the web, many of them require a separate license even if you purchased it for your desktop...Goto google.com/webfonts and see if you can;t find something similar.
I support font designers. I pay for my fonts.And I said Microsoft, if I need Arial Black and I m using Linux, do you think I m going to buy it?. but, Gill Sans MT was created by mr. Gill in 1926. and here it says :
Don't worry, I support designers more than a lot of people, I just knew that somebody was going to interpret that as bragging. Alright, I said too much already. Before I start getting called a troll. Far from that, I dedicated my life to art. I m just worried when people think that a company like Microsoft deserves respect. Do you think they care about artists?
I always check licenses before using fonts...if you don't, even if it is unintentional and the license does not explicitly list that you may use it for web, you are in fact stealing.
fontsquirrel along with google webfonts both have plenty of pre-made resources for free appropriately licensed fonts...I highly suggest you look there...
I don't use Google fonts often, but I can certainly understand @TheDoc's vote. I think the better question would be why you wouldn't recommend Google Web Fonts @ChristopherBurton?
You say that you use Font Squirrel to generate the correct @font-face CSS, but Google Web Fonts also use @font-face. The rendering may not be as nice as Typekit, but it's no different to using Font Squirrel.
Is it due to their selection? Not everyone will have the same tastes as you or I.
It takes the load off your own server, gives you fully optimized and hand-hinted fonts, allows asynchronous loading of fonts if you so desire. Using FontSquirrel is a good option, but you get greater compatibility and peace of mind by using a hosted service such as Typekit or Google web fonts.
Edit: I do advocate for Typekit because I think they have a quality product and share the passion of typography. However, there are more and more foundries looking at options outside of both of these resources. This is what Hoefler & Frere-Jones are doing when they release their web fonts (currently in beta).
Can any one solve this problem?
"i don't have any license for that i have downloaded that from a free site"
The font is not free and comes with a license.
We all should be supporting type designers, not steal from them.
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/fonts/font.aspx?FMID=979
Don't worry, I support designers more than a lot of people, I just knew that somebody was going to interpret that as bragging. Alright, I said too much already. Before I start getting called a troll. Far from that, I dedicated my life to art. I m just worried when people think that a company like Microsoft deserves respect. Do you think they care about artists?
My point was that Gill Sans is not free as the person above said he acquired it for free.
fontsquirrel along with google webfonts both have plenty of pre-made resources for free appropriately licensed fonts...I highly suggest you look there...
You say that you use Font Squirrel to generate the correct @font-face CSS, but Google Web Fonts also use @font-face. The rendering may not be as nice as Typekit, but it's no different to using Font Squirrel.
Is it due to their selection? Not everyone will have the same tastes as you or I.
It takes the load off your own server, gives you fully optimized and hand-hinted fonts, allows asynchronous loading of fonts if you so desire. Using FontSquirrel is a good option, but you get greater compatibility and peace of mind by using a hosted service such as Typekit or Google web fonts.
This is partly why I dislike Google Web Fonts and where my opinion is valid. - http://typographica.org/2011/on-typography/roboto-typeface-is-a-four-headed-frankenstein
Comments from Matthew Butterick and Jonathan Hoefler - http://typographica.org/2011/on-typography/roboto-typeface-is-a-four-headed-frankenstein/#comment-40271
Edit: I do advocate for Typekit because I think they have a quality product and share the passion of typography. However, there are more and more foundries looking at options outside of both of these resources. This is what Hoefler & Frere-Jones are doing when they release their web fonts (currently in beta).
I was confronted by someone who has a published font with Google.
His font: http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Cantarell