Font Appearance & Size Changed When Copying Docs to other LO version & OS


I copied some LO .odt documents from:

  • LO ver. on a Windows 8.1 PC
  • LO ver. on a Windows 10 PC

When I opened the docs in the new version on Win 10, the font appearances and sizes had completely changed, screwing up the look and formatting. The new look is terrible.

The odd things are:

  • The font names and sizes are “listed” as being exactly the same in both documents / versions, but their appearances are totally different.
  • Since the names and sizes are listed as the same, I’m unable to correct the issue by simply “correcting” the font name…I’d have to choose an entirely different font that won’t look the same as the original document. Plus I’d have to completely reformat the document (font sizes, spacing, etc.)


  • Why do the fonts appear completely differently between documents?
  • Can it be fixed, and how?
  • Can this be prevented in the future when transferring other documents?

(I couldn’t find an answer elsewhere on this site.
Also, should this be in the feedback leg?)

Thanks in advance for help.

The font name and size are reported by Writer exactly how you specified them. But you say your PCs are under different OS versions. It may then happen that the available fonts are not the same on both computers. When one font is missing a substitute is used. You can tell by looking at the toolbar. A missing font is displayed italic.

Since the metrics of substitutes are rarely the same as the original font, this is enough to explain the differences in look.

1 Like

Ah, This is indeed what’s happened!
The two changed fonts are in italics & missing from the list.
Thanks for solving the mystery, @ajlittoz!

OK, so what’s confusing is why doesn’t LO then rename the fonts to what the substitute is instead of keeping the incorrect name for the substitute font? This would have made it very obvious to figure out.
(It didn’t occur to me since one of them is an old standard that’s been listed “forever,” & is also a script font so the identifying “italics” didn’t stand out.)
Plus, It’d be nice to have them identified correctly to know what they are (must use 3rd party app I suppose).

Should identifying them “correctly” be a suggestion for the Feedback section? I can see some reasoning for the current option, but totally confusing.

I’m very surprised these fonts got dropped as they are favorites used often.
I suppose I can see if they are available to download. But I’m guessing that even if downloaded & changed back, anyone else rendering the documents on a Win 10/11 machine would also experience the messed-up formatting which means I’d probably have to convert the documents to PDFs. What a hassle to change everything (& disappointed for the lost good fonts).

Thanks again for your prompt and helpful replies. :+1: :slightly_smiling_face:

(Edit: For some reason this reply utility won’t keep my spacing, perhaps because I already marked the answer as solution. Sorry.)


Thanks, @mikekaganski; helpful document except that I’m not getting the same dialog box as shown in the example; the view and options in my “font” tab of the box is very limited – only showing a few check boxes. What am I missing? Thanks!

Well, you decided for the font in the first place. Writer has no legitimacy to change the font face on its own. You are the author, not Writer. Consequently, it is better to keep your requirement and report it can’t be fulfilled completely. I agree that italic feedback is rather inconspicuous . Some other notification is probably needed. I don’t think added red colour for instance would bring more attention because some people are colour-blind.

In my recurrent usage, I prefer that my templates are not changed because they are my deliberate choice. But I chose rather unusual font faces for aesthetical reasons. Consequently when I reconfigure my computers from scratch, downloading again my preferred fonts is on my todo list xith other tasks. I made a memo to assist me.

I suppose you refer to some mockups there. The link is to some proposal, not to something already implemented. The design team created the mockups, but they weren’t coded.

My purpose was to inform you that this topic is considered (even if solutions are not implemented yet).

1 Like

Thanks, @ajlittoz. Though I think you may have misunderstood what I meant since I wasn’t suggesting that Writer change the font face or for it to redo something I did or that it’s not capable of.
What I was suggesting is that since Writer substituted the font (necessarily so), then it would be helpful for that substitute font to be named correctly – i.e. when the font is selected in the changed document, for it to be identified correctly, not assigned the name of the original font, which is now wrong for the substitute that is displayed, and confusing. I do see the argument for keeping the original name (for reference to original document); however, it creates a very confusing situation. I agree that there needs to be a more obvious solution to flagging the change since using italics for a script font (that’s already slanted) is not at all obvious (and I’m even a detail-oriented person). :grin:

…Perhaps a highlight or symbol – it’d be really great to be able to hover over such a “flag” and see the change as an edit from the original to the new …something like: “Calibri —> Tahoma” (made-up example).

1 Like

Ah, OK – thanks for the clarification, @mikekaganski! Would be great to have it implemented or another simple solution such as that I suggested in my reply to @ajlittoz.

Cheers, and thanks to you all for the help! :slightly_smiling_face: