This is an excerpt of a script I found and I have a question about the font.

enter image description here

I think for this type you need the command


I tried applying this and the result was almost perfect, the only problem was that the words that were bold, for example in \section{Introduction}, were not bold at all. They looked like this in my output

enter image description here

My explicit question: How can one use African Latin (T4) font so that the boldness is not affected (like in the script)? What are the right packages or commands?

Here is a zoomed in version

enter image description here

  • 2
    Sorry, what exactly are you asking? Do you have a source? How did you obtain this picture? Why should you want to use a legacy encoding for African letters?
    – Ingmar
    Commented May 25, 2022 at 13:05
  • why T4 rather than the standard western european T1 encoding? Or even the obsolete but still default OT1 Commented May 25, 2022 at 13:15
  • @DavidCarlisle My motives are not relevant, I just want to know it for fun. I like this font. Commented May 25, 2022 at 13:16
  • 2
    the letter shapes are likely to be the same in any case, but T4 is a specialist encoding with a much reduced font support so fine if you want it but not having font variants such as bold is to be expected. That said, t4cmr.fd does declare bold variants Commented May 25, 2022 at 13:20
  • 2
    you are just using the default computer modern aren't you? Commented May 25, 2022 at 13:45

1 Answer 1


On an up-to-date TeX Live 2022, the only supported fonts for the T4 encoding are a variant of Courier that can be loaded with \renewcommant\familydefault{fcr}, and the default Computer Modern family. All of these produce Type 3 bitmap fonts that will come out as pixelated in a PDF. Since nobody rasterizes LaTeX documents to DVI and prints them out on paper any longer, I would not recommend you use this encoding today. If you need the glyphs for one of the languages it supports, you could get better output from a Unicode font in LuaLaTeX or XeLaTeX. More to the point, your image does not appear to have been generated with \usepackage[T4]{fontenc}.

I am not sure on what basis you believe this document used that encoding. I am unaware of any other German documents that do. If you are looking at a list of fonts and seeing their formats displayed as “Type 1” or “Type 3,” keep in mind that these are Adobe PostScript font identities, totally unrelated to the LaTeX encodings from the 1990s called T1, T2A, T3, and so on.

I also cannot reproduce your bug with the bold fonts on an up-to-date TeX Live 2022. The header displays (in an obsolete format) just fine for me with \usepackage[T4]{fontenc}.

  • So you say the document I presented is not encoded in T4? Then I ask myself what kind of encoded was used... Commented May 25, 2022 at 17:23
  • @calculatormathematical It would be possible to tell by examining the bytes of the file, but probably either Cork encoding or Unicode.
    – Davislor
    Commented May 25, 2022 at 17:25
  • I added a zoomed in version and it looks like african latin Commented May 25, 2022 at 18:20
  • @calculatormathematical The zoomed-in version shows that this document uses a Type-3 bitmap font. My guess would be that this document was created using T1 or OT1 encoding using a METAFONT version of Computer Modern, on a very old or misconfigured installation, or by compiling the document to DVI and then converting that to PDF. However, T4 encoding is possible.
    – Davislor
    Commented May 25, 2022 at 18:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .