On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:22:45 +0200
Michael <[email protected]> wrote:

| I am trying to render some text as an image using an outline effect.
| According to the examples pages I am using
| 
| convert -size 620x250 xc:none -font zurchki.ttf -pointsize 40 -kerning -2
| -fill white -stroke black -strokewidth 8 -annotate +25+65 'Text' -font
| zurchki.ttf -pointsize 40 -kerning -2 -fill white -stroke black -strokewidth
| 1 -annotate +25+65 'Text' headline.png
| 
| The result is almost OK, but compared to the result coming from Photoshop
| the Anti-Aliasing is much worse. Is there any "magick way" for improving
| that?
| _______________________________________________
| Magick-users mailing list
| [email protected]
| http://studio.imagemagick.org/mailman/listinfo/magick-users

You do not need to repeat the settings for each -annotate, only modify
the ones that change.

   convert -size 620x250 xc:none \
           -font zurchki.ttf -pointsize 40 -kerning -2 \
           fill white -stroke black \
           -strokewidth 8 -annotate +25+65 'Text' \
           -strokewidth 1 -annotate +25+65 'Text' \
           headline.png

PS: I suggest simply setting -stroke none  instead of adjusting
-strokewidth, It may produce a cleaner internal edge.

Photoshop and FreeType (what Magick uses internally) are completely
separate is their development. I am not surprised you will find some
differences.  But the differences should not be too great.

Photoshop could be using a technique called 'cleartype' to increase
the horizontal resolution of a font by designing it to use the color
pattern found on LCD displays.

It may also be using a different 'density' or resolution for the
pointsize used, as photoshop would be able to get your display
resolution.  Both of these factors effect the final size of the font in
terms of pixels.

Another Technique is to just double the density (not pointsize) and
image size you are generating then -resize the down by 50% to improve
and sharpen the results.  This technique is known as 'Super-Sampling'
and is a very good way of improving the general quality of the results.

This last technique is used a lot for Postscript and PDF handling for
Display purposes.

If you want more, I suggest you post a request (with links to some
example images) on the IM Discussion forum instead.
  http://www.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewforum.php?f=1

  Anthony Thyssen ( System Programmer )    <[email protected]>
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Warning: May contain traces of nuts.
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Anthony's Home is his Castle     http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~anthony/
_______________________________________________
Magick-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://studio.imagemagick.org/mailman/listinfo/magick-users

Reply via email to