How to make this curly 'R' (ℛ)?












3















Which package has a similar looking fancy R or does anyone know how to make one? (Note: the line underneath the R is just the notebook paper... this is from a scanned set of notes).



enter image description here










share|improve this question

























  • Where you have seen this symbol? Thank you.

    – Sebastiano
    yesterday






  • 1





    The closest I could find on the web is Lauren Script font, but requires using fontspec.

    – Bernard
    yesterday











  • @Bernard Hello very kind. In fact I don't see any correlation with the classic LaTeX fonts.

    – Sebastiano
    yesterday






  • 1





    No, if you have to use it, it has to be imported. The simplest is via xelatex or lualatex + fontspec. Of course any font can be adapted for use with LaTeX, but it takes quite some tome to do.

    – Bernard
    yesterday






  • 1





    @user2154420...check this: tex.stackexchange.com/a/481251/120578

    – koleygr
    yesterday
















3















Which package has a similar looking fancy R or does anyone know how to make one? (Note: the line underneath the R is just the notebook paper... this is from a scanned set of notes).



enter image description here










share|improve this question

























  • Where you have seen this symbol? Thank you.

    – Sebastiano
    yesterday






  • 1





    The closest I could find on the web is Lauren Script font, but requires using fontspec.

    – Bernard
    yesterday











  • @Bernard Hello very kind. In fact I don't see any correlation with the classic LaTeX fonts.

    – Sebastiano
    yesterday






  • 1





    No, if you have to use it, it has to be imported. The simplest is via xelatex or lualatex + fontspec. Of course any font can be adapted for use with LaTeX, but it takes quite some tome to do.

    – Bernard
    yesterday






  • 1





    @user2154420...check this: tex.stackexchange.com/a/481251/120578

    – koleygr
    yesterday














3












3








3








Which package has a similar looking fancy R or does anyone know how to make one? (Note: the line underneath the R is just the notebook paper... this is from a scanned set of notes).



enter image description here










share|improve this question
















Which package has a similar looking fancy R or does anyone know how to make one? (Note: the line underneath the R is just the notebook paper... this is from a scanned set of notes).



enter image description here







math-mode fonts symbols






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 6 hours ago









Jonas Stein

3,22042644




3,22042644










asked yesterday









user2154420user2154420

16817




16817













  • Where you have seen this symbol? Thank you.

    – Sebastiano
    yesterday






  • 1





    The closest I could find on the web is Lauren Script font, but requires using fontspec.

    – Bernard
    yesterday











  • @Bernard Hello very kind. In fact I don't see any correlation with the classic LaTeX fonts.

    – Sebastiano
    yesterday






  • 1





    No, if you have to use it, it has to be imported. The simplest is via xelatex or lualatex + fontspec. Of course any font can be adapted for use with LaTeX, but it takes quite some tome to do.

    – Bernard
    yesterday






  • 1





    @user2154420...check this: tex.stackexchange.com/a/481251/120578

    – koleygr
    yesterday



















  • Where you have seen this symbol? Thank you.

    – Sebastiano
    yesterday






  • 1





    The closest I could find on the web is Lauren Script font, but requires using fontspec.

    – Bernard
    yesterday











  • @Bernard Hello very kind. In fact I don't see any correlation with the classic LaTeX fonts.

    – Sebastiano
    yesterday






  • 1





    No, if you have to use it, it has to be imported. The simplest is via xelatex or lualatex + fontspec. Of course any font can be adapted for use with LaTeX, but it takes quite some tome to do.

    – Bernard
    yesterday






  • 1





    @user2154420...check this: tex.stackexchange.com/a/481251/120578

    – koleygr
    yesterday

















Where you have seen this symbol? Thank you.

– Sebastiano
yesterday





Where you have seen this symbol? Thank you.

– Sebastiano
yesterday




1




1





The closest I could find on the web is Lauren Script font, but requires using fontspec.

– Bernard
yesterday





The closest I could find on the web is Lauren Script font, but requires using fontspec.

– Bernard
yesterday













@Bernard Hello very kind. In fact I don't see any correlation with the classic LaTeX fonts.

– Sebastiano
yesterday





@Bernard Hello very kind. In fact I don't see any correlation with the classic LaTeX fonts.

– Sebastiano
yesterday




1




1





No, if you have to use it, it has to be imported. The simplest is via xelatex or lualatex + fontspec. Of course any font can be adapted for use with LaTeX, but it takes quite some tome to do.

– Bernard
yesterday





No, if you have to use it, it has to be imported. The simplest is via xelatex or lualatex + fontspec. Of course any font can be adapted for use with LaTeX, but it takes quite some tome to do.

– Bernard
yesterday




1




1





@user2154420...check this: tex.stackexchange.com/a/481251/120578

– koleygr
yesterday





@user2154420...check this: tex.stackexchange.com/a/481251/120578

– koleygr
yesterday










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















5














My answer is by using tikz (but with simple lines and not fill to add effect of width):



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{}
newcommand{fancyR}{sbox1{vbox{R}}sbox2{hbox{R}}tikz[inner sep=0pt,outer sep=0pt]{coordinate (A);draw[-,black,line width=0.55pt,scale=0.75]([shift={({thewd2/2},0)}]A) to[out=180,in=0] ++(-{thewd2/2},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/5)}) to[in=90,out=180]++({-thewd2/5},{-(theht1+thedp1)/8})
to[in=270,out=270]++({thewd2/2},{7*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
to[in=0,out=90]++(-{7*thewd2/20},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
to[in=90,out=180]++(-{13*thewd2/24},-{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
to[in=180,out=270]++({3*thewd2/12},{-4*(theht1+thedp1)/10})
to[in=270,out=0]++({11*thewd2/48},{(theht1+thedp1)/3})
to[in=300,out=90]++(-{3*thewd2/13},{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
to[in=40,out=120]++(-{6*thewd2/10},-{1*(theht1+thedp1)/6});
}}
begin{document}
$mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$
end{document}


Output:



enter image description here






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    See what happens when you do {Huge $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$} and then consider using line width=0.06em instead. BTW, you could drop all of the sbox, wd and dp stuff in favor of relative units, see tex.stackexchange.com/a/480818/121799. (And what is usetikzlibrary{} good for?)

    – marmot
    2 hours ago











  • Thanks @marmot... I have already read that post. My idea was the relative height and width too, but didn't thought to use em or ex because I tried to use the actual R's lengths (I know this is not exactly working!). The answer was posted somehow faster than should and I forgot to use line width too in relation with my measured sizes. Of course I could have save the lengths too instead of retyping. I will edit soon. Thanks. (tikzlibrary{} just left there and loads features about nothing :P )

    – koleygr
    2 hours ago





















7














In the modern toolchain with unicode-math, you can set any TrueType or OpenType font as your script alphabet (or calligraphic, or a new alphabet). For this example, I downloaded the OTF version of Odelette by Adi Marwah into a subdirectory of my project folder named fonts.



documentclass[varwidth]{standalone}
usepackage{unicode-math}

defaultfontfeatures{Scale = MatchUppercase}
setmathfont{Latin Modern Math}
setmathfont[Path = ./fonts/, range = scr]{Odelette.otf}

begin{document}
[ mathscr{R} subset mathscr{T} ]
end{document}


Odelette sample






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    Upvoted you. :-). In fact to have the similar R we must go out the "classic" font LaTeX using font .ttf or otf.

    – Sebastiano
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    @Sebastiano Thanks! The R from Stardust Adventure looks even more like the handwriting, but in my opinion Odelette looks pretty reasonable as a math alphabet. It comes down to personal taste.

    – Davislor
    4 hours ago













  • I always vote positively efforts, what I'm trying to make understand to users of Physics.SE. If you are registered you will find a -5 :-) on my question. Rigid thinking makes me sad.

    – Sebastiano
    4 hours ago











  • @Sebastiano I don’t believe I’m registered there, but I’ve been on SX communities where, if I tried to actually help a new user, I got flamed for making it harder to efficiently delete and remove “bad questions.” TeX.SX is much friendlier!

    – Davislor
    4 hours ago













  • I agree with you at the 100%.

    – Sebastiano
    4 hours ago



















5














Here are two fancy R options:



enter image description here



You can consult Table 307: Math Alphabets on page 119 of the comprehensive list for other options.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    Looks like mtpro2 curly font to me :-)

    – Sebastiano
    yesterday











  • @user2154420: I posted my answer before koleygr's comment. Your question did not indicate any knowledge of standard sources such as the comprehensive list. If you don't find this answer helpful, fine. But please refrain from insulting me (or other users on this site). We are only trying to be helpful.

    – Sandy G
    23 hours ago











  • Your message came to me :-( Then I knew just afterwards. But then I read the previous comments that didn't refer to me. I'm not the type to insult or offend. My upvoted.

    – Sebastiano
    12 hours ago






  • 2





    In fact, none of the alphabets in table 307 of the comprehensive lists contains an "R" with this shape. The mathpro2 curly font (as identified by @Sebastiano) is the closest that I know, but this font is commercial and must be paid for. (And that is the reason it's not in the comprehensive list.) The letter may also be in other commercial fonts that I'm not familiar with. The graphicdesign.stackexchange site might be helpful in this respect.

    – barbara beeton
    12 hours ago






  • 1





    @Sebastiano: Very wise. Thank you for the advice. Tanti auguri!

    – Sandy G
    5 hours ago



















3














If you could obtain a higher-res image of it, or better still an image in vector format, then this approach would work for most situations. However, it is impervious to things like textit, textcolor, etc.



documentclass{article}
usepackage{scalerel}
newcommandfancyR{scalerel*{includegraphics{fancyR}}{R}}
begin{document}

$abfancyR c scriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

$ y = x^{fancyR}$

$abfancyR c quadscriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

$x_{fancyR} = 0$
end{document}


enter image description here






share|improve this answer


























  • No Steven :-):-) is very ugly! Bleah :-(.

    – Sebastiano
    10 hours ago











  • @Sebastiano It is ugly because the original provided by the OP was low resolution. When provided in high resolution, or as a vector image, a much better result ensues: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/224357/…

    – Steven B. Segletes
    10 hours ago











  • Yeah, I know. You don't have to justify yourself. I was just smiling as each of us tries to do everything possible to get the best for the user. I'm sorry he offended Sandy, however.

    – Sebastiano
    9 hours ago











  • @Sebastiano No offense was taken. I thought I detected your tongue in your cheek, but wasn't 100% sure. You are right...as it stands, it is very ugly!

    – Steven B. Segletes
    9 hours ago






  • 1





    @Sebastiano Correct. I am not talking about vectorinzing a rastor image, but rather creating a vector master image, created with lines and arcs, rather than pixels. That or a hi-def rastor image to start with.

    – Steven B. Segletes
    9 hours ago



















0














I prefer this from (mt2pro) (the image is taken from this link https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html):



https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html



documentclass[12pt]{book}
usepackage[mtpccal]{mtpro2}
begin{document}
[
mathcal{R}
]
end{document}


If you prefer there is also this font TeX Gyre Pagella Math for the character bit curly R.



enter image description here



documentclass{article}
usepackage{unicode-math}
newcommand{nR}{mathversion{Pagella} $mathscr{R}$}
setmathfont[version=Pagella]{TeX Gyre Pagella Math}

begin{document}
nR
end{document}





share|improve this answer

































    0














    Apart from the traditional mathcal{R} and mathsrc{R} mentioned in other answers (with appropriate packages, of course), consider using xelatex with the font GL-Suetterlin:



    image of all the letters






    share|improve this answer























      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "85"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f481230%2fhow-to-make-this-curly-r-%25e2%2584%259b%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      6 Answers
      6






      active

      oldest

      votes








      6 Answers
      6






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      5














      My answer is by using tikz (but with simple lines and not fill to add effect of width):



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts}
      usepackage{tikz}
      usetikzlibrary{}
      newcommand{fancyR}{sbox1{vbox{R}}sbox2{hbox{R}}tikz[inner sep=0pt,outer sep=0pt]{coordinate (A);draw[-,black,line width=0.55pt,scale=0.75]([shift={({thewd2/2},0)}]A) to[out=180,in=0] ++(-{thewd2/2},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/5)}) to[in=90,out=180]++({-thewd2/5},{-(theht1+thedp1)/8})
      to[in=270,out=270]++({thewd2/2},{7*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=0,out=90]++(-{7*thewd2/20},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=90,out=180]++(-{13*thewd2/24},-{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=180,out=270]++({3*thewd2/12},{-4*(theht1+thedp1)/10})
      to[in=270,out=0]++({11*thewd2/48},{(theht1+thedp1)/3})
      to[in=300,out=90]++(-{3*thewd2/13},{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=40,out=120]++(-{6*thewd2/10},-{1*(theht1+thedp1)/6});
      }}
      begin{document}
      $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$
      end{document}


      Output:



      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer



















      • 1





        See what happens when you do {Huge $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$} and then consider using line width=0.06em instead. BTW, you could drop all of the sbox, wd and dp stuff in favor of relative units, see tex.stackexchange.com/a/480818/121799. (And what is usetikzlibrary{} good for?)

        – marmot
        2 hours ago











      • Thanks @marmot... I have already read that post. My idea was the relative height and width too, but didn't thought to use em or ex because I tried to use the actual R's lengths (I know this is not exactly working!). The answer was posted somehow faster than should and I forgot to use line width too in relation with my measured sizes. Of course I could have save the lengths too instead of retyping. I will edit soon. Thanks. (tikzlibrary{} just left there and loads features about nothing :P )

        – koleygr
        2 hours ago


















      5














      My answer is by using tikz (but with simple lines and not fill to add effect of width):



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts}
      usepackage{tikz}
      usetikzlibrary{}
      newcommand{fancyR}{sbox1{vbox{R}}sbox2{hbox{R}}tikz[inner sep=0pt,outer sep=0pt]{coordinate (A);draw[-,black,line width=0.55pt,scale=0.75]([shift={({thewd2/2},0)}]A) to[out=180,in=0] ++(-{thewd2/2},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/5)}) to[in=90,out=180]++({-thewd2/5},{-(theht1+thedp1)/8})
      to[in=270,out=270]++({thewd2/2},{7*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=0,out=90]++(-{7*thewd2/20},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=90,out=180]++(-{13*thewd2/24},-{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=180,out=270]++({3*thewd2/12},{-4*(theht1+thedp1)/10})
      to[in=270,out=0]++({11*thewd2/48},{(theht1+thedp1)/3})
      to[in=300,out=90]++(-{3*thewd2/13},{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=40,out=120]++(-{6*thewd2/10},-{1*(theht1+thedp1)/6});
      }}
      begin{document}
      $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$
      end{document}


      Output:



      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer



















      • 1





        See what happens when you do {Huge $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$} and then consider using line width=0.06em instead. BTW, you could drop all of the sbox, wd and dp stuff in favor of relative units, see tex.stackexchange.com/a/480818/121799. (And what is usetikzlibrary{} good for?)

        – marmot
        2 hours ago











      • Thanks @marmot... I have already read that post. My idea was the relative height and width too, but didn't thought to use em or ex because I tried to use the actual R's lengths (I know this is not exactly working!). The answer was posted somehow faster than should and I forgot to use line width too in relation with my measured sizes. Of course I could have save the lengths too instead of retyping. I will edit soon. Thanks. (tikzlibrary{} just left there and loads features about nothing :P )

        – koleygr
        2 hours ago
















      5












      5








      5







      My answer is by using tikz (but with simple lines and not fill to add effect of width):



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts}
      usepackage{tikz}
      usetikzlibrary{}
      newcommand{fancyR}{sbox1{vbox{R}}sbox2{hbox{R}}tikz[inner sep=0pt,outer sep=0pt]{coordinate (A);draw[-,black,line width=0.55pt,scale=0.75]([shift={({thewd2/2},0)}]A) to[out=180,in=0] ++(-{thewd2/2},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/5)}) to[in=90,out=180]++({-thewd2/5},{-(theht1+thedp1)/8})
      to[in=270,out=270]++({thewd2/2},{7*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=0,out=90]++(-{7*thewd2/20},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=90,out=180]++(-{13*thewd2/24},-{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=180,out=270]++({3*thewd2/12},{-4*(theht1+thedp1)/10})
      to[in=270,out=0]++({11*thewd2/48},{(theht1+thedp1)/3})
      to[in=300,out=90]++(-{3*thewd2/13},{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=40,out=120]++(-{6*thewd2/10},-{1*(theht1+thedp1)/6});
      }}
      begin{document}
      $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$
      end{document}


      Output:



      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer













      My answer is by using tikz (but with simple lines and not fill to add effect of width):



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts}
      usepackage{tikz}
      usetikzlibrary{}
      newcommand{fancyR}{sbox1{vbox{R}}sbox2{hbox{R}}tikz[inner sep=0pt,outer sep=0pt]{coordinate (A);draw[-,black,line width=0.55pt,scale=0.75]([shift={({thewd2/2},0)}]A) to[out=180,in=0] ++(-{thewd2/2},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/5)}) to[in=90,out=180]++({-thewd2/5},{-(theht1+thedp1)/8})
      to[in=270,out=270]++({thewd2/2},{7*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=0,out=90]++(-{7*thewd2/20},{3*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=90,out=180]++(-{13*thewd2/24},-{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=180,out=270]++({3*thewd2/12},{-4*(theht1+thedp1)/10})
      to[in=270,out=0]++({11*thewd2/48},{(theht1+thedp1)/3})
      to[in=300,out=90]++(-{3*thewd2/13},{11*(theht1+thedp1)/12})
      to[in=40,out=120]++(-{6*thewd2/10},-{1*(theht1+thedp1)/6});
      }}
      begin{document}
      $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$
      end{document}


      Output:



      enter image description here







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered 11 hours ago









      koleygrkoleygr

      13.2k11038




      13.2k11038








      • 1





        See what happens when you do {Huge $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$} and then consider using line width=0.06em instead. BTW, you could drop all of the sbox, wd and dp stuff in favor of relative units, see tex.stackexchange.com/a/480818/121799. (And what is usetikzlibrary{} good for?)

        – marmot
        2 hours ago











      • Thanks @marmot... I have already read that post. My idea was the relative height and width too, but didn't thought to use em or ex because I tried to use the actual R's lengths (I know this is not exactly working!). The answer was posted somehow faster than should and I forgot to use line width too in relation with my measured sizes. Of course I could have save the lengths too instead of retyping. I will edit soon. Thanks. (tikzlibrary{} just left there and loads features about nothing :P )

        – koleygr
        2 hours ago
















      • 1





        See what happens when you do {Huge $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$} and then consider using line width=0.06em instead. BTW, you could drop all of the sbox, wd and dp stuff in favor of relative units, see tex.stackexchange.com/a/480818/121799. (And what is usetikzlibrary{} good for?)

        – marmot
        2 hours ago











      • Thanks @marmot... I have already read that post. My idea was the relative height and width too, but didn't thought to use em or ex because I tried to use the actual R's lengths (I know this is not exactly working!). The answer was posted somehow faster than should and I forgot to use line width too in relation with my measured sizes. Of course I could have save the lengths too instead of retyping. I will edit soon. Thanks. (tikzlibrary{} just left there and loads features about nothing :P )

        – koleygr
        2 hours ago










      1




      1





      See what happens when you do {Huge $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$} and then consider using line width=0.06em instead. BTW, you could drop all of the sbox, wd and dp stuff in favor of relative units, see tex.stackexchange.com/a/480818/121799. (And what is usetikzlibrary{} good for?)

      – marmot
      2 hours ago





      See what happens when you do {Huge $mathbb{R}$RfancyR{}$R$} and then consider using line width=0.06em instead. BTW, you could drop all of the sbox, wd and dp stuff in favor of relative units, see tex.stackexchange.com/a/480818/121799. (And what is usetikzlibrary{} good for?)

      – marmot
      2 hours ago













      Thanks @marmot... I have already read that post. My idea was the relative height and width too, but didn't thought to use em or ex because I tried to use the actual R's lengths (I know this is not exactly working!). The answer was posted somehow faster than should and I forgot to use line width too in relation with my measured sizes. Of course I could have save the lengths too instead of retyping. I will edit soon. Thanks. (tikzlibrary{} just left there and loads features about nothing :P )

      – koleygr
      2 hours ago







      Thanks @marmot... I have already read that post. My idea was the relative height and width too, but didn't thought to use em or ex because I tried to use the actual R's lengths (I know this is not exactly working!). The answer was posted somehow faster than should and I forgot to use line width too in relation with my measured sizes. Of course I could have save the lengths too instead of retyping. I will edit soon. Thanks. (tikzlibrary{} just left there and loads features about nothing :P )

      – koleygr
      2 hours ago













      7














      In the modern toolchain with unicode-math, you can set any TrueType or OpenType font as your script alphabet (or calligraphic, or a new alphabet). For this example, I downloaded the OTF version of Odelette by Adi Marwah into a subdirectory of my project folder named fonts.



      documentclass[varwidth]{standalone}
      usepackage{unicode-math}

      defaultfontfeatures{Scale = MatchUppercase}
      setmathfont{Latin Modern Math}
      setmathfont[Path = ./fonts/, range = scr]{Odelette.otf}

      begin{document}
      [ mathscr{R} subset mathscr{T} ]
      end{document}


      Odelette sample






      share|improve this answer



















      • 1





        Upvoted you. :-). In fact to have the similar R we must go out the "classic" font LaTeX using font .ttf or otf.

        – Sebastiano
        10 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano Thanks! The R from Stardust Adventure looks even more like the handwriting, but in my opinion Odelette looks pretty reasonable as a math alphabet. It comes down to personal taste.

        – Davislor
        4 hours ago













      • I always vote positively efforts, what I'm trying to make understand to users of Physics.SE. If you are registered you will find a -5 :-) on my question. Rigid thinking makes me sad.

        – Sebastiano
        4 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano I don’t believe I’m registered there, but I’ve been on SX communities where, if I tried to actually help a new user, I got flamed for making it harder to efficiently delete and remove “bad questions.” TeX.SX is much friendlier!

        – Davislor
        4 hours ago













      • I agree with you at the 100%.

        – Sebastiano
        4 hours ago
















      7














      In the modern toolchain with unicode-math, you can set any TrueType or OpenType font as your script alphabet (or calligraphic, or a new alphabet). For this example, I downloaded the OTF version of Odelette by Adi Marwah into a subdirectory of my project folder named fonts.



      documentclass[varwidth]{standalone}
      usepackage{unicode-math}

      defaultfontfeatures{Scale = MatchUppercase}
      setmathfont{Latin Modern Math}
      setmathfont[Path = ./fonts/, range = scr]{Odelette.otf}

      begin{document}
      [ mathscr{R} subset mathscr{T} ]
      end{document}


      Odelette sample






      share|improve this answer



















      • 1





        Upvoted you. :-). In fact to have the similar R we must go out the "classic" font LaTeX using font .ttf or otf.

        – Sebastiano
        10 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano Thanks! The R from Stardust Adventure looks even more like the handwriting, but in my opinion Odelette looks pretty reasonable as a math alphabet. It comes down to personal taste.

        – Davislor
        4 hours ago













      • I always vote positively efforts, what I'm trying to make understand to users of Physics.SE. If you are registered you will find a -5 :-) on my question. Rigid thinking makes me sad.

        – Sebastiano
        4 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano I don’t believe I’m registered there, but I’ve been on SX communities where, if I tried to actually help a new user, I got flamed for making it harder to efficiently delete and remove “bad questions.” TeX.SX is much friendlier!

        – Davislor
        4 hours ago













      • I agree with you at the 100%.

        – Sebastiano
        4 hours ago














      7












      7








      7







      In the modern toolchain with unicode-math, you can set any TrueType or OpenType font as your script alphabet (or calligraphic, or a new alphabet). For this example, I downloaded the OTF version of Odelette by Adi Marwah into a subdirectory of my project folder named fonts.



      documentclass[varwidth]{standalone}
      usepackage{unicode-math}

      defaultfontfeatures{Scale = MatchUppercase}
      setmathfont{Latin Modern Math}
      setmathfont[Path = ./fonts/, range = scr]{Odelette.otf}

      begin{document}
      [ mathscr{R} subset mathscr{T} ]
      end{document}


      Odelette sample






      share|improve this answer













      In the modern toolchain with unicode-math, you can set any TrueType or OpenType font as your script alphabet (or calligraphic, or a new alphabet). For this example, I downloaded the OTF version of Odelette by Adi Marwah into a subdirectory of my project folder named fonts.



      documentclass[varwidth]{standalone}
      usepackage{unicode-math}

      defaultfontfeatures{Scale = MatchUppercase}
      setmathfont{Latin Modern Math}
      setmathfont[Path = ./fonts/, range = scr]{Odelette.otf}

      begin{document}
      [ mathscr{R} subset mathscr{T} ]
      end{document}


      Odelette sample







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered 11 hours ago









      DavislorDavislor

      6,9441431




      6,9441431








      • 1





        Upvoted you. :-). In fact to have the similar R we must go out the "classic" font LaTeX using font .ttf or otf.

        – Sebastiano
        10 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano Thanks! The R from Stardust Adventure looks even more like the handwriting, but in my opinion Odelette looks pretty reasonable as a math alphabet. It comes down to personal taste.

        – Davislor
        4 hours ago













      • I always vote positively efforts, what I'm trying to make understand to users of Physics.SE. If you are registered you will find a -5 :-) on my question. Rigid thinking makes me sad.

        – Sebastiano
        4 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano I don’t believe I’m registered there, but I’ve been on SX communities where, if I tried to actually help a new user, I got flamed for making it harder to efficiently delete and remove “bad questions.” TeX.SX is much friendlier!

        – Davislor
        4 hours ago













      • I agree with you at the 100%.

        – Sebastiano
        4 hours ago














      • 1





        Upvoted you. :-). In fact to have the similar R we must go out the "classic" font LaTeX using font .ttf or otf.

        – Sebastiano
        10 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano Thanks! The R from Stardust Adventure looks even more like the handwriting, but in my opinion Odelette looks pretty reasonable as a math alphabet. It comes down to personal taste.

        – Davislor
        4 hours ago













      • I always vote positively efforts, what I'm trying to make understand to users of Physics.SE. If you are registered you will find a -5 :-) on my question. Rigid thinking makes me sad.

        – Sebastiano
        4 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano I don’t believe I’m registered there, but I’ve been on SX communities where, if I tried to actually help a new user, I got flamed for making it harder to efficiently delete and remove “bad questions.” TeX.SX is much friendlier!

        – Davislor
        4 hours ago













      • I agree with you at the 100%.

        – Sebastiano
        4 hours ago








      1




      1





      Upvoted you. :-). In fact to have the similar R we must go out the "classic" font LaTeX using font .ttf or otf.

      – Sebastiano
      10 hours ago





      Upvoted you. :-). In fact to have the similar R we must go out the "classic" font LaTeX using font .ttf or otf.

      – Sebastiano
      10 hours ago




      1




      1





      @Sebastiano Thanks! The R from Stardust Adventure looks even more like the handwriting, but in my opinion Odelette looks pretty reasonable as a math alphabet. It comes down to personal taste.

      – Davislor
      4 hours ago







      @Sebastiano Thanks! The R from Stardust Adventure looks even more like the handwriting, but in my opinion Odelette looks pretty reasonable as a math alphabet. It comes down to personal taste.

      – Davislor
      4 hours ago















      I always vote positively efforts, what I'm trying to make understand to users of Physics.SE. If you are registered you will find a -5 :-) on my question. Rigid thinking makes me sad.

      – Sebastiano
      4 hours ago





      I always vote positively efforts, what I'm trying to make understand to users of Physics.SE. If you are registered you will find a -5 :-) on my question. Rigid thinking makes me sad.

      – Sebastiano
      4 hours ago













      @Sebastiano I don’t believe I’m registered there, but I’ve been on SX communities where, if I tried to actually help a new user, I got flamed for making it harder to efficiently delete and remove “bad questions.” TeX.SX is much friendlier!

      – Davislor
      4 hours ago







      @Sebastiano I don’t believe I’m registered there, but I’ve been on SX communities where, if I tried to actually help a new user, I got flamed for making it harder to efficiently delete and remove “bad questions.” TeX.SX is much friendlier!

      – Davislor
      4 hours ago















      I agree with you at the 100%.

      – Sebastiano
      4 hours ago





      I agree with you at the 100%.

      – Sebastiano
      4 hours ago











      5














      Here are two fancy R options:



      enter image description here



      You can consult Table 307: Math Alphabets on page 119 of the comprehensive list for other options.






      share|improve this answer



















      • 1





        Looks like mtpro2 curly font to me :-)

        – Sebastiano
        yesterday











      • @user2154420: I posted my answer before koleygr's comment. Your question did not indicate any knowledge of standard sources such as the comprehensive list. If you don't find this answer helpful, fine. But please refrain from insulting me (or other users on this site). We are only trying to be helpful.

        – Sandy G
        23 hours ago











      • Your message came to me :-( Then I knew just afterwards. But then I read the previous comments that didn't refer to me. I'm not the type to insult or offend. My upvoted.

        – Sebastiano
        12 hours ago






      • 2





        In fact, none of the alphabets in table 307 of the comprehensive lists contains an "R" with this shape. The mathpro2 curly font (as identified by @Sebastiano) is the closest that I know, but this font is commercial and must be paid for. (And that is the reason it's not in the comprehensive list.) The letter may also be in other commercial fonts that I'm not familiar with. The graphicdesign.stackexchange site might be helpful in this respect.

        – barbara beeton
        12 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano: Very wise. Thank you for the advice. Tanti auguri!

        – Sandy G
        5 hours ago
















      5














      Here are two fancy R options:



      enter image description here



      You can consult Table 307: Math Alphabets on page 119 of the comprehensive list for other options.






      share|improve this answer



















      • 1





        Looks like mtpro2 curly font to me :-)

        – Sebastiano
        yesterday











      • @user2154420: I posted my answer before koleygr's comment. Your question did not indicate any knowledge of standard sources such as the comprehensive list. If you don't find this answer helpful, fine. But please refrain from insulting me (or other users on this site). We are only trying to be helpful.

        – Sandy G
        23 hours ago











      • Your message came to me :-( Then I knew just afterwards. But then I read the previous comments that didn't refer to me. I'm not the type to insult or offend. My upvoted.

        – Sebastiano
        12 hours ago






      • 2





        In fact, none of the alphabets in table 307 of the comprehensive lists contains an "R" with this shape. The mathpro2 curly font (as identified by @Sebastiano) is the closest that I know, but this font is commercial and must be paid for. (And that is the reason it's not in the comprehensive list.) The letter may also be in other commercial fonts that I'm not familiar with. The graphicdesign.stackexchange site might be helpful in this respect.

        – barbara beeton
        12 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano: Very wise. Thank you for the advice. Tanti auguri!

        – Sandy G
        5 hours ago














      5












      5








      5







      Here are two fancy R options:



      enter image description here



      You can consult Table 307: Math Alphabets on page 119 of the comprehensive list for other options.






      share|improve this answer













      Here are two fancy R options:



      enter image description here



      You can consult Table 307: Math Alphabets on page 119 of the comprehensive list for other options.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered yesterday









      Sandy GSandy G

      4,2051632




      4,2051632








      • 1





        Looks like mtpro2 curly font to me :-)

        – Sebastiano
        yesterday











      • @user2154420: I posted my answer before koleygr's comment. Your question did not indicate any knowledge of standard sources such as the comprehensive list. If you don't find this answer helpful, fine. But please refrain from insulting me (or other users on this site). We are only trying to be helpful.

        – Sandy G
        23 hours ago











      • Your message came to me :-( Then I knew just afterwards. But then I read the previous comments that didn't refer to me. I'm not the type to insult or offend. My upvoted.

        – Sebastiano
        12 hours ago






      • 2





        In fact, none of the alphabets in table 307 of the comprehensive lists contains an "R" with this shape. The mathpro2 curly font (as identified by @Sebastiano) is the closest that I know, but this font is commercial and must be paid for. (And that is the reason it's not in the comprehensive list.) The letter may also be in other commercial fonts that I'm not familiar with. The graphicdesign.stackexchange site might be helpful in this respect.

        – barbara beeton
        12 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano: Very wise. Thank you for the advice. Tanti auguri!

        – Sandy G
        5 hours ago














      • 1





        Looks like mtpro2 curly font to me :-)

        – Sebastiano
        yesterday











      • @user2154420: I posted my answer before koleygr's comment. Your question did not indicate any knowledge of standard sources such as the comprehensive list. If you don't find this answer helpful, fine. But please refrain from insulting me (or other users on this site). We are only trying to be helpful.

        – Sandy G
        23 hours ago











      • Your message came to me :-( Then I knew just afterwards. But then I read the previous comments that didn't refer to me. I'm not the type to insult or offend. My upvoted.

        – Sebastiano
        12 hours ago






      • 2





        In fact, none of the alphabets in table 307 of the comprehensive lists contains an "R" with this shape. The mathpro2 curly font (as identified by @Sebastiano) is the closest that I know, but this font is commercial and must be paid for. (And that is the reason it's not in the comprehensive list.) The letter may also be in other commercial fonts that I'm not familiar with. The graphicdesign.stackexchange site might be helpful in this respect.

        – barbara beeton
        12 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano: Very wise. Thank you for the advice. Tanti auguri!

        – Sandy G
        5 hours ago








      1




      1





      Looks like mtpro2 curly font to me :-)

      – Sebastiano
      yesterday





      Looks like mtpro2 curly font to me :-)

      – Sebastiano
      yesterday













      @user2154420: I posted my answer before koleygr's comment. Your question did not indicate any knowledge of standard sources such as the comprehensive list. If you don't find this answer helpful, fine. But please refrain from insulting me (or other users on this site). We are only trying to be helpful.

      – Sandy G
      23 hours ago





      @user2154420: I posted my answer before koleygr's comment. Your question did not indicate any knowledge of standard sources such as the comprehensive list. If you don't find this answer helpful, fine. But please refrain from insulting me (or other users on this site). We are only trying to be helpful.

      – Sandy G
      23 hours ago













      Your message came to me :-( Then I knew just afterwards. But then I read the previous comments that didn't refer to me. I'm not the type to insult or offend. My upvoted.

      – Sebastiano
      12 hours ago





      Your message came to me :-( Then I knew just afterwards. But then I read the previous comments that didn't refer to me. I'm not the type to insult or offend. My upvoted.

      – Sebastiano
      12 hours ago




      2




      2





      In fact, none of the alphabets in table 307 of the comprehensive lists contains an "R" with this shape. The mathpro2 curly font (as identified by @Sebastiano) is the closest that I know, but this font is commercial and must be paid for. (And that is the reason it's not in the comprehensive list.) The letter may also be in other commercial fonts that I'm not familiar with. The graphicdesign.stackexchange site might be helpful in this respect.

      – barbara beeton
      12 hours ago





      In fact, none of the alphabets in table 307 of the comprehensive lists contains an "R" with this shape. The mathpro2 curly font (as identified by @Sebastiano) is the closest that I know, but this font is commercial and must be paid for. (And that is the reason it's not in the comprehensive list.) The letter may also be in other commercial fonts that I'm not familiar with. The graphicdesign.stackexchange site might be helpful in this respect.

      – barbara beeton
      12 hours ago




      1




      1





      @Sebastiano: Very wise. Thank you for the advice. Tanti auguri!

      – Sandy G
      5 hours ago





      @Sebastiano: Very wise. Thank you for the advice. Tanti auguri!

      – Sandy G
      5 hours ago











      3














      If you could obtain a higher-res image of it, or better still an image in vector format, then this approach would work for most situations. However, it is impervious to things like textit, textcolor, etc.



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{scalerel}
      newcommandfancyR{scalerel*{includegraphics{fancyR}}{R}}
      begin{document}

      $abfancyR c scriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

      $ y = x^{fancyR}$

      $abfancyR c quadscriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

      $x_{fancyR} = 0$
      end{document}


      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer


























      • No Steven :-):-) is very ugly! Bleah :-(.

        – Sebastiano
        10 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano It is ugly because the original provided by the OP was low resolution. When provided in high resolution, or as a vector image, a much better result ensues: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/224357/…

        – Steven B. Segletes
        10 hours ago











      • Yeah, I know. You don't have to justify yourself. I was just smiling as each of us tries to do everything possible to get the best for the user. I'm sorry he offended Sandy, however.

        – Sebastiano
        9 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano No offense was taken. I thought I detected your tongue in your cheek, but wasn't 100% sure. You are right...as it stands, it is very ugly!

        – Steven B. Segletes
        9 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano Correct. I am not talking about vectorinzing a rastor image, but rather creating a vector master image, created with lines and arcs, rather than pixels. That or a hi-def rastor image to start with.

        – Steven B. Segletes
        9 hours ago
















      3














      If you could obtain a higher-res image of it, or better still an image in vector format, then this approach would work for most situations. However, it is impervious to things like textit, textcolor, etc.



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{scalerel}
      newcommandfancyR{scalerel*{includegraphics{fancyR}}{R}}
      begin{document}

      $abfancyR c scriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

      $ y = x^{fancyR}$

      $abfancyR c quadscriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

      $x_{fancyR} = 0$
      end{document}


      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer


























      • No Steven :-):-) is very ugly! Bleah :-(.

        – Sebastiano
        10 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano It is ugly because the original provided by the OP was low resolution. When provided in high resolution, or as a vector image, a much better result ensues: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/224357/…

        – Steven B. Segletes
        10 hours ago











      • Yeah, I know. You don't have to justify yourself. I was just smiling as each of us tries to do everything possible to get the best for the user. I'm sorry he offended Sandy, however.

        – Sebastiano
        9 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano No offense was taken. I thought I detected your tongue in your cheek, but wasn't 100% sure. You are right...as it stands, it is very ugly!

        – Steven B. Segletes
        9 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano Correct. I am not talking about vectorinzing a rastor image, but rather creating a vector master image, created with lines and arcs, rather than pixels. That or a hi-def rastor image to start with.

        – Steven B. Segletes
        9 hours ago














      3












      3








      3







      If you could obtain a higher-res image of it, or better still an image in vector format, then this approach would work for most situations. However, it is impervious to things like textit, textcolor, etc.



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{scalerel}
      newcommandfancyR{scalerel*{includegraphics{fancyR}}{R}}
      begin{document}

      $abfancyR c scriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

      $ y = x^{fancyR}$

      $abfancyR c quadscriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

      $x_{fancyR} = 0$
      end{document}


      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer















      If you could obtain a higher-res image of it, or better still an image in vector format, then this approach would work for most situations. However, it is impervious to things like textit, textcolor, etc.



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{scalerel}
      newcommandfancyR{scalerel*{includegraphics{fancyR}}{R}}
      begin{document}

      $abfancyR c scriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

      $ y = x^{fancyR}$

      $abfancyR c quadscriptscriptstyle abfancyR c$

      $x_{fancyR} = 0$
      end{document}


      enter image description here







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 10 hours ago

























      answered 10 hours ago









      Steven B. SegletesSteven B. Segletes

      159k9204412




      159k9204412













      • No Steven :-):-) is very ugly! Bleah :-(.

        – Sebastiano
        10 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano It is ugly because the original provided by the OP was low resolution. When provided in high resolution, or as a vector image, a much better result ensues: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/224357/…

        – Steven B. Segletes
        10 hours ago











      • Yeah, I know. You don't have to justify yourself. I was just smiling as each of us tries to do everything possible to get the best for the user. I'm sorry he offended Sandy, however.

        – Sebastiano
        9 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano No offense was taken. I thought I detected your tongue in your cheek, but wasn't 100% sure. You are right...as it stands, it is very ugly!

        – Steven B. Segletes
        9 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano Correct. I am not talking about vectorinzing a rastor image, but rather creating a vector master image, created with lines and arcs, rather than pixels. That or a hi-def rastor image to start with.

        – Steven B. Segletes
        9 hours ago



















      • No Steven :-):-) is very ugly! Bleah :-(.

        – Sebastiano
        10 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano It is ugly because the original provided by the OP was low resolution. When provided in high resolution, or as a vector image, a much better result ensues: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/224357/…

        – Steven B. Segletes
        10 hours ago











      • Yeah, I know. You don't have to justify yourself. I was just smiling as each of us tries to do everything possible to get the best for the user. I'm sorry he offended Sandy, however.

        – Sebastiano
        9 hours ago











      • @Sebastiano No offense was taken. I thought I detected your tongue in your cheek, but wasn't 100% sure. You are right...as it stands, it is very ugly!

        – Steven B. Segletes
        9 hours ago






      • 1





        @Sebastiano Correct. I am not talking about vectorinzing a rastor image, but rather creating a vector master image, created with lines and arcs, rather than pixels. That or a hi-def rastor image to start with.

        – Steven B. Segletes
        9 hours ago

















      No Steven :-):-) is very ugly! Bleah :-(.

      – Sebastiano
      10 hours ago





      No Steven :-):-) is very ugly! Bleah :-(.

      – Sebastiano
      10 hours ago













      @Sebastiano It is ugly because the original provided by the OP was low resolution. When provided in high resolution, or as a vector image, a much better result ensues: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/224357/…

      – Steven B. Segletes
      10 hours ago





      @Sebastiano It is ugly because the original provided by the OP was low resolution. When provided in high resolution, or as a vector image, a much better result ensues: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/224357/…

      – Steven B. Segletes
      10 hours ago













      Yeah, I know. You don't have to justify yourself. I was just smiling as each of us tries to do everything possible to get the best for the user. I'm sorry he offended Sandy, however.

      – Sebastiano
      9 hours ago





      Yeah, I know. You don't have to justify yourself. I was just smiling as each of us tries to do everything possible to get the best for the user. I'm sorry he offended Sandy, however.

      – Sebastiano
      9 hours ago













      @Sebastiano No offense was taken. I thought I detected your tongue in your cheek, but wasn't 100% sure. You are right...as it stands, it is very ugly!

      – Steven B. Segletes
      9 hours ago





      @Sebastiano No offense was taken. I thought I detected your tongue in your cheek, but wasn't 100% sure. You are right...as it stands, it is very ugly!

      – Steven B. Segletes
      9 hours ago




      1




      1





      @Sebastiano Correct. I am not talking about vectorinzing a rastor image, but rather creating a vector master image, created with lines and arcs, rather than pixels. That or a hi-def rastor image to start with.

      – Steven B. Segletes
      9 hours ago





      @Sebastiano Correct. I am not talking about vectorinzing a rastor image, but rather creating a vector master image, created with lines and arcs, rather than pixels. That or a hi-def rastor image to start with.

      – Steven B. Segletes
      9 hours ago











      0














      I prefer this from (mt2pro) (the image is taken from this link https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html):



      https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html



      documentclass[12pt]{book}
      usepackage[mtpccal]{mtpro2}
      begin{document}
      [
      mathcal{R}
      ]
      end{document}


      If you prefer there is also this font TeX Gyre Pagella Math for the character bit curly R.



      enter image description here



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{unicode-math}
      newcommand{nR}{mathversion{Pagella} $mathscr{R}$}
      setmathfont[version=Pagella]{TeX Gyre Pagella Math}

      begin{document}
      nR
      end{document}





      share|improve this answer






























        0














        I prefer this from (mt2pro) (the image is taken from this link https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html):



        https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html



        documentclass[12pt]{book}
        usepackage[mtpccal]{mtpro2}
        begin{document}
        [
        mathcal{R}
        ]
        end{document}


        If you prefer there is also this font TeX Gyre Pagella Math for the character bit curly R.



        enter image description here



        documentclass{article}
        usepackage{unicode-math}
        newcommand{nR}{mathversion{Pagella} $mathscr{R}$}
        setmathfont[version=Pagella]{TeX Gyre Pagella Math}

        begin{document}
        nR
        end{document}





        share|improve this answer




























          0












          0








          0







          I prefer this from (mt2pro) (the image is taken from this link https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html):



          https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html



          documentclass[12pt]{book}
          usepackage[mtpccal]{mtpro2}
          begin{document}
          [
          mathcal{R}
          ]
          end{document}


          If you prefer there is also this font TeX Gyre Pagella Math for the character bit curly R.



          enter image description here



          documentclass{article}
          usepackage{unicode-math}
          newcommand{nR}{mathversion{Pagella} $mathscr{R}$}
          setmathfont[version=Pagella]{TeX Gyre Pagella Math}

          begin{document}
          nR
          end{document}





          share|improve this answer















          I prefer this from (mt2pro) (the image is taken from this link https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html):



          https://www.pctex.com/mtpro2.html



          documentclass[12pt]{book}
          usepackage[mtpccal]{mtpro2}
          begin{document}
          [
          mathcal{R}
          ]
          end{document}


          If you prefer there is also this font TeX Gyre Pagella Math for the character bit curly R.



          enter image description here



          documentclass{article}
          usepackage{unicode-math}
          newcommand{nR}{mathversion{Pagella} $mathscr{R}$}
          setmathfont[version=Pagella]{TeX Gyre Pagella Math}

          begin{document}
          nR
          end{document}






          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 2 hours ago

























          answered 5 hours ago









          SebastianoSebastiano

          11.1k42164




          11.1k42164























              0














              Apart from the traditional mathcal{R} and mathsrc{R} mentioned in other answers (with appropriate packages, of course), consider using xelatex with the font GL-Suetterlin:



              image of all the letters






              share|improve this answer




























                0














                Apart from the traditional mathcal{R} and mathsrc{R} mentioned in other answers (with appropriate packages, of course), consider using xelatex with the font GL-Suetterlin:



                image of all the letters






                share|improve this answer


























                  0












                  0








                  0







                  Apart from the traditional mathcal{R} and mathsrc{R} mentioned in other answers (with appropriate packages, of course), consider using xelatex with the font GL-Suetterlin:



                  image of all the letters






                  share|improve this answer













                  Apart from the traditional mathcal{R} and mathsrc{R} mentioned in other answers (with appropriate packages, of course), consider using xelatex with the font GL-Suetterlin:



                  image of all the letters







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 39 mins ago









                  user49915user49915

                  627121




                  627121






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f481230%2fhow-to-make-this-curly-r-%25e2%2584%259b%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      A CLEAN and SIMPLE way to add appendices to Table of Contents and bookmarks

                      Calculate evaluation metrics using cross_val_predict sklearn

                      Insert data from modal to MySQL (multiple modal on website)