Fonts fouling up in word pictures

[Jeff Wiseman]

Currently using Office for mac 2004 (word 11.1) on a G5 iMac
using OS 10.3.8


I am still just a relatively "light" user of Word (I watch this
group off an on). Up until yesterday, I've dealt specifically
with text only Word documents. I needed to print out some
business cards that I had in Appleworks format and then
discovered that the font I originally used on my old OS8.6 system
for the cards is no longer there (I think it was the Mac version
of Helvetica Narrow). All of the fonts that come with Office and
OS10.3.8 that are similar are too dense for my specific application.

"OK" says me, slightly expanding on the character spacing on one
of my current fonts would probably be acceptable for my
application. Oops, Appleworks won't do that so I guess I'll try
Word since it has character spacing control.

My first foray into Word graphics...

So I copy-pasted one of my cards into a word document. As I
expected, everything sort of got scrambled but the pieces I
wanted were still there. I then edited the "Word Picture" (I
think that is what it was called) to get the font selections and
graphic spacings set up where I wanted. Everything seemed to be
ok, so I adjusted my document margines and then replicated the
card picture 9 times to fill the page and match the layout of my
Avery business card sheets. Note that I have not yet done
anything with the font spacing. The only thing was to change the
font values from the defaults set at import to what I wanted.

I then noticed that the fonts on the page when viewed in page
layout mode were not readable. Instead of characters, there was a
jagged black block where each character was located. At first I
just thought "Ok, so Word doesn't seem to properly render the
small fonts contained in graphics. So what else is new?"
Unfortunately, when I printed out the page, it printed out
exactly as it showed on the screen with black blocks in place of
each font character.

So in a nasty sort of way it seems that Word was actually giving
me true WYSIWYG at the one time I was hoping it wouldn't :-(

So I've gone back to Appleworks since it easily works, I just
have to live with the default kerning of the fonts.

Am I seeing a common problem here or something unique? I could
post the 1 page document here for examination but I couldn't
remember whether or not that was acceptable in this forum.

Any ideas?

 

[matt neuburg]

I then noticed that the fonts on the page when viewed in page
layout mode were not readable. Instead of characters, there was a
jagged black block where each character was located

Am I seeing a common problem here or something unique?

It's not unique. I commented on this same problem about a year ago. This
was with a picture that printed fine in Word X; in Word 2004 it made the
blocks for characters that you describe. m.

 

[Jeff Wiseman]

It's not unique. I commented on this same problem about a year ago. This
was with a picture that printed fine in Word X; in Word 2004 it made the
blocks for characters that you describe. m.

Thanks for the feedback Matt!

So what was the outcome? If you have Word 2004 just forget trying
to print documents with text in graphics because it can't be done?

(wouldn't be the first time I've had to do this type of thing

 

[matt neuburg]

Thanks for the feedback Matt!

So what was the outcome?

Well, there were two possible approaches that worked.

(1) Keep Word X on hand for these situations. There's other stuff Word X
can do that Word 2004 can't do (like make a table of contents without
crashing) so that's not a bad solution.

(2) Create the picture all over again without the text, and superimpose
the text as a text block. So the text isn't in the picture, it's on the
picture.

m.

 

[Jeff Wiseman]

Well, there were two possible approaches that worked.

(1) Keep Word X on hand for these situations. There's other stuff Word X
can do that Word 2004 can't do (like make a table of contents without
crashing) so that's not a bad solution.

Well, as I am currently unemployed, I can't justify this option.
However, even if I could, I have a *REAL* problem with having to
purchase a second Microsoft product for the sole reason that the
first one I bought doesn't do what it is supposed to!

(2) Create the picture all over again without the text, and superimpose
the text as a text block. So the text isn't in the picture, it's on the
picture.

This is really useful information. Since the texts in each of my
pictures seem to be in "text boxes" themselves, is it possible to
select all of the text boxes in the picture (as a set), cut them,
close the picture, and then paste them back on top of the picture?

 

[John McGhie [MVP - Word and Word Macintosh]]

Hi Jeff:

Yes, you could cut the text out of the pictures and paste it back in as an
overlaid text box, and that may be one way out of your dilemma.

Basically, what you have been hit with are "layering issues" and "Unicode
issues".

Layering issues are often cured in Word 2004 by double-clicking the picture
to open it into Edit mode, then simply closing it and saving the document.
It causes Word to recompute the layers. You often do not need to even make
a change: simply closing the picture and re-saving the document is
sufficient.

You may also find that removing the text, then typing it back in in Word
will fix the issue. Word has some problems with the text if it has been
created in a graphic by a different application. Rather than type it back
in, you can Edit>Paste Special>Unformatted... Then format the text yourself
into the font and kerning that you like.

The Unicode issues can be a problem. I am assuming that the original text
was created in a non-Unicode font. Word will try to convert that to
Unicode, but if the Unicode fonts you have do not contain the characters you
need you get problems. (The problems tend to show as hollow boxes, rather
than black squares, so I think your problem is "layering" not "Unicode")

If you are going to layer your text on top of your graphic, then spend some
time in the Help looking up Anchors and how to use them, and finding the
Grouping command. To group the objects you will need to format both the
picture and the text box as floating rather than Inline with Text.

Hope this helps

Well, as I am currently unemployed, I can't justify this option.
However, even if I could, I have a *REAL* problem with having to
purchase a second Microsoft product for the sole reason that the
first one I bought doesn't do what it is supposed to!




This is really useful information. Since the texts in each of my
pictures seem to be in "text boxes" themselves, is it possible to
select all of the text boxes in the picture (as a set), cut them,
close the picture, and then paste them back on top of the picture?

--

Please reply to the newsgroup to maintain the thread. Please do not email
me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie <[email protected]>
Microsoft MVP, Word and Word for Macintosh. Consultant Technical Writer
Sydney, Australia +61 4 1209 1410

 

[Jeff Wiseman]

Hi Jeff:

Yes, you could cut the text out of the pictures and paste it back in as an
overlaid text box, and that may be one way out of your dilemma.

Actually, since 95% of the picture is text and it is replicated
in other areas, this is a significant step backward.

Basically, what you have been hit with are "layering issues" and "Unicode
issues".

Layering issues are often cured in Word 2004 by double-clicking the picture
to open it into Edit mode, then simply closing it and saving the document.
It causes Word to recompute the layers. You often do not need to even make
a change: simply closing the picture and re-saving the document is
sufficient.

I have been trying this in several ways several times. Any text
(whether it is just graphics text or text box texts) absolutely
refuses to render properly once the picture editor is closed.
I've tried what you suggested a few times but it doesn't help.

You may also find that removing the text, then typing it back in in Word
will fix the issue. Word has some problems with the text if it has been
created in a graphic by a different application. Rather than type it back
in, you can Edit>Paste Special>Unformatted... Then format the text yourself
into the font and kerning that you like.

Tried that too. Opened the picture, created a new text box, added
some characters, then closed the picture. Nothing but jagged
black blocks instead of characters.

On suspicion of how I created the original pictures, I took a
document and did an Insert->Object->Microsoft Word Picture to
create a brand new picture. I then typed a few characters in the
picture. I then created a text box inside the picture and typed a
few characters. Lo and behold, when I closed the picture editor I
could actually read the text in the text box in the picture.
Unfortunately, the other text (i.e., that not inside a text box)
in the picture was trashed.

So far at least 95% or all text that I've seen inside of Word
pictures refuses to render in a way that is readable.

The Unicode issues can be a problem. I am assuming that the original text
was created in a non-Unicode font. Word will try to convert that to
Unicode, but if the Unicode fonts you have do not contain the characters you
need you get problems. (The problems tend to show as hollow boxes, rather
than black squares, so I think your problem is "layering" not "Unicode")

I agree due to the above mentioned experiences

If you are going to layer your text on top of your graphic, then spend some
time in the Help looking up Anchors and how to use them, and finding the
Grouping command. To group the objects you will need to format both the
picture and the text box as floating rather than Inline with Text.

Hope this helps

Thanks for the suggestion. Had a quick look at it. Seems to be
anchor behaviors typical of several documenting programs I've
worked with but it seems to have some very spastic
idiosyncracies. E.g., an inline anchor is relative to the text
stream it's in but when making the anchor visible, it sits way
out of the text colum (i.e., so where is the anchor exactly?).

Setting the graphics up this way is a total nuisance for the
application I have which is for several small textual graphic
pictures that I need to maintain as cohesive entities. Looks like
I'm back to using Appleworks since it has done this all 100%
solid since the 1980's. Maintaining an entire slew of anchors for
a dozen objects in each diagram I need is a ridiculously involved
workaround (easily subject to error, I might add) for a very
rudimentary function that is obviously broken.

Thanks a lot for the help! As you know though, if there's no gas
in the car, all the tuning in the world ain't gonna make it go
anywhere

 

[Beth Rosengard]

Hi Jeff,

I have no idea why those black blocks are there and I'll let you and John
hash that one out. But I think I have a workaround for you. Try this.

Open the Word picture into the edit window. Do a "Save Copy As". The
result will be a Word document containing your card, looking fine and
printing fine.

--
***Please always reply to the newsgroup!***

Beth Rosengard
MacOffice MVP

Mac Word FAQ: <http://word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/index.htm>
(If using Safari, hit Refresh once or twice ­ or use another browser.)
Entourage Help Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org>

 

[Jeff Wiseman]

Hi Jeff,

I have no idea why those black blocks are there and I'll let you and John
hash that one out. But I think I have a workaround for you. Try this.

Open the Word picture into the edit window. Do a "Save Copy As". The
result will be a Word document containing your card, looking fine and
printing fine.

Ahh, so it basically converts the self contained "Word Picture"
into a stand alone document with no Word Pictures in it. That's
why it works as you say, since text inside Word Pictures seems to
be broken in Word 2004.

In other "words", Word Pictures in Word 2004 are totally useless
for any pictures that have words in them...

I might be able to use this some though. My ACTUAL document had
10 of those pictures on the same page so they could be printed on
some Avery business card blanks. Duplicating the 7 objects in the
card (5 text boxes and 2 rules) 9 times each and altering the
anchor properties for each replication's new offset so that they
stack correctly on the page is the nuisance that I was referring
to in one of my last notes.

Having everything in a cohesive package (i.e., the Word picture)
allows them to be uniformily duplicated and moved around without
problems. At least, that is the way this type of thing is
*SUPPOSED* to be done if the friggin' tool wasn't busted :-S

Anyway, your suggestion still appears to be an easy way to get
the "parts" out of the picture with the registration for all of
their anchors maintained and unaltered. It also may be a good
preamble to one other thing I've not yet tried. I suspect that
there is a print control method that would allow me to create a
single card has you have directed, and then use the printing
processes to replicate it enough times to properly fill an Avery
Business card blank. I've just not gotten around to exploring
anything like that yet.

And besides, although it might solve my business card issue, the
larger issue regarding Word's broken handling of text inside of
Word Pictures still remains. I'm an engineer and to me, graphics
without text in them describing things are very rare

 

[Jeff Wiseman]

Hi Jeff:

OK, I took a massive risk and grabbed your attachment, so now I can see
exactly what you are talking about. You were correct all along: this one IS
a bug, and it *is* broken

It's not a layering problem, and it's not a Unicode problem. My bet is that
it's an ATSUI or QuickDraw problem.

That's why I've referred to it as rendering. It would appear (as
you've pointed out) that Word 2004 is not playing nicely with the
ATS system. It was mentioned earlier that Word X doesn't seem to
have this problem so it's not like there isn't a fix of some kind
on Microsoft's side.

There is no "cure" for this other than to re-do the graphic object. It is
the object itself that has corrupted.

And re-doing the graphic doesn't seem to help either, at least
not on my system. More below.

I am returning two treatments by separate email. On is a simple Save out of
Word 2003 on the PC. I have the two networked, I simply opened the document
on the Mac using Word 2003 on the PC, opened the picture, closed it, and
Saved.

The other was done in Word 2004 on the Mac. I simply selected all of the
objects in the picture and Grouped them using the Draw toolbar. I then Cut
them, closed the picture, Pasted them, moved them where I wanted and deleted
the original object.

I opened the word 2004 doc on my system and it looks identical to
the one I sent you complete with black jaggy blocks. So either
you sent me back the one I sent out, or nothing was affected by
what you did. BTW, in your description of what you did with the
word 2004 doc, when you pasted the grouped objects back into the
document, I assume that you put them into a new Word Picture. The
Word 2004 doc you sent me had them in a word picture. If they had
been pasted exactly as you say, it would have looked ok since
there was no word picture to foul up the fonts (similar to the
suggestion made by Beth earlier in this thread).

The Word 2003 version also had a problem. You could read it but
the font (and all associated spacings) had been changed to what
looks like Courier. If I open the word picture in that document,
the fonts INSIDE if the picture are all still correctly
identified (Helvetica Neue) but when closing the picture, they
still display in that serif'ed monospace font. If I edit the word
picture and touch ANYTHING having to do with text (e.g., add a
single letter in one of the text boxes), when I close the picture
editor, all of the text characters go back to that same useless
black block display.

Neither move "should" have been necessary, and that's the bug. Which I have
sent to the developers for them to sort out.

Actually, on my system at least, there is NO work around it would
seem since it is just plain broken. The moves do not fix
anything. This is a fault, not a "bug" IMHO.

I purchased a product from Microsoft that is broken. Do you think
if I returned it to them they would give me one that works?

 

[John McGhie [MVP - Word and Word Macintosh]]

Hi Jeff:

And re-doing the graphic doesn't seem to help either, at least
not on my system. More below.

Please send me your changed version of the two files that you got from me.
I want to see what happened to them: they displayed and printed fine here...

I purchased a product from Microsoft that is broken. Do you think
if I returned it to them they would give me one that works?

They would give you your money back, or they would give you a copy of Word
X. Neither would "work" If you spoke to them very nicely, they might
upgrade you to a copy of Mac Office 2004 Professional. THAT contains
Windows XP, which would enable you to run a real copy of Word 2003, which
seems not to have this problem.

Word X does not have "this" problem, because it does not use ATS. Word X
was built around QuickDraw, so it has "other" problems (no Unicode, for
example...). Microsoft will give us ALL one that "works" just as soon as
they make that.

No: The picture I sent you back from Word 2004 does not have a Word Picture
in it: it's a set of grouped Word Drawing Objects that are sitting above the
text layer.

Cheers

--

Please reply to the newsgroup to maintain the thread. Please do not email
me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie <[email protected]>
Microsoft MVP, Word and Word for Macintosh. Consultant Technical Writer
Sydney, Australia +61 4 1209 1410

 

[Jeff Wiseman]

Please send me your changed version of the two files that you got from me.
I want to see what happened to them: they displayed and printed fine here...

Done. I suspect that the 2004 one was a mistake. I tried what
Beth Rosengard suggested earlier and it worked fine (i.e.,
totally removing all Word Pictures and using document level
graphics). What you said you did should have produced the same
results.

No: The picture I sent you back from Word 2004 does not have a Word Picture
in it: it's a set of grouped Word Drawing Objects that are sitting above the
text layer.

I think you accidentally sent me back my original. See above.