# How do I get URW Nimbus Roman font? [duplicate]

I really like the font used in this article and want to use it in my documents. Does anyone have any idea of how I can do so?

EDIT: I've found out that the font is URW Nimbus Roman (thanks for pointing me towards the posts telling me how to figure it out). So my question is how can I get this font? What packages do I have to load etc? Sorry, complete amateur here! Thanks for the help!

It looks like Liberation Serif, a font that seems to be the default option with LibreOffice on Mac, and is quite similar in appearance to Times New Roman.

XeLaTeX can use any of your system fonts, so if you have the desired font installed, you simply include that in your document as you would any other font. This can even be done on a per-language basis. For example, if you wish to use Angsana New font for Thai language text in your document, you can define it as follows:

\usepackage{polyglossia}
\setmainlanguage{english}
\setotherlanguage{thai}
\newfontfamily\thaifont[Script=Thai, Renderer=AAT]{Angsana New}


Using the fontspec package with XeTeX or LuaTeX should also allow you to use any TTF font installed in your system. See here for more: Installing TTF fonts in LaTeX

The URW Nimbus Roman font seems to be available by download from here: https://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/nimbus-roman-no9-l

There are fonts contained in TeXLive for the Nimbus family (https://ctan.org/pkg/nimbus15). Loading them as an add on over other solutions might be better suited, please read the documentation.

\documentclass[]{article}

\usepackage{iftex}

\iftutex
%% LuaLaTeX or XeLaTeX
\usepackage{fontspec}
\setmainfont{ztm}
\else
%% pdfLaTeX
\usepackage{nimbusserif}
\fi

\begin{document}
\section{Introduction}
can be said to have normative authority over reasoning. I claim that there is an
interesting sense in which logic can indeed be said to be normative for
reasoning. To substantiate my claim, I proceed as follows. I begin by laying
out Gilbert Harman's influential skeptical challenge to the thesis that logic
and norms of reasoning are interestingly related. According to Harman, once we
realize that principles of deductive logic are not nrms of reasoning in and of
themselves, a gap opens up between the two. Thus, a response to Harman's
challenge would consist in what John MacFarlane (2004) has fittingly dubbed a
bridge principle'---a general principle articulating a substantive and
\end{document}
`

Result using LuaLaTeX: