On Saturday 21 September 2002 4:28 am, Tim Roberts wrote:
| On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 20:49:09 +0400, Vadim Plessky wrote:
| >So far, Microsoft is a way behind FreeType in terms of quality for
| > rendered text.
|
| This is an exaggeration.
Do you have results of in-depth research or at least some screenshots
supporting your statement?
|
| >Non-AA text in Win98/Win2000 is ugly, ClearType-rendered text is blurred
| > and not easy to read.
|
| I'm not sure what you're using for criteria. FreeType 1.x sucked at the
* Microsoft e-book Reader with ClearType technology, running on Windows 98
* Compaq Presario 1800 notebook, with 15" TFT LCD.
* Mandrake Linux 8.2, XFree86 4.2.0-6mdk, AA enabled, Freetype 2.1.3-RC2
* Adobe Type Manager 4.1 / Windows
* 24-bit RGB display mode
* tested _many_ different fonts, including MS TrueType fonts, Adobe fonts, URW
fotns, and my own fonts.
* tested different formats: PS Type1, PS Type3, OpenType (Adobe CFF/Type2
format), TrueType
| small sizes typically used on desktops; FreeType 2.x is at least able to
| match the non-AA text in Windows, but it is not measurably better.
Have you tried FreeType 2.1.3-RC2?
| Practically speaking, it CAN'T be; there just aren't enough pixels to
| tweak.
Do you have something to support your statement?
I would also appreciate if you can read
http://www.freetype.org/freetype2/smooth-hinting.html
and test FreeType 2.1.3-RC2 or current FreeType CVS snapshot.
You can download it from here:
ftp://www.freetype.org/freetype/freetype2/freetype-2.1.3rc2.tar.bz2
ftp://www.freetype.org/freetype/freetype2/ft2demos-2.1.3rc2.tar.bz2
Be sure to replace Xfree86's FreeType with this one after compile/install.
There are mutiple places where typical Linux distro can put freetype library:
[vad@VPlessky vad]$ locate libfreetype.so.6
/usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6
/usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6.3.2
/usr/X11R6/lib/libfreetype.so.6
/usr/X11R6/lib/libfreetype.so.6.3.2
/usr/local/lib/libfreetype.so.6
/usr/local/lib/libfreetype.so.6.3.2
(NOTE: I created symlinks for libfreetype.so.6 manually)
|
| ClearType text is glorious on an LCD, for which it was designed. It is
| not a net gain for a CRT, and I think that has damaged its reputation.
|
I can't find ClearType glorious.
It's a way better than default non-AA rendering (or AA-rendering using 5
shades of gray) of TT fonts in Windows 95/98, an dit's better comparing to
ATM 4.1.
But in general, I have impression that ClearType is unfinished (5 years afte
rinitial introduction at SIGGRAPH) and not very well designed (*requirement*
of LCD display is ridiculuos, in my opinion)
| For AA text, I agree with you. AA text in Windows is really a mixed bag.
| I run it on my laptop, but it is not a clear win. It seems to do a
| particularly bad job with thin verticals.
|
| --
| - Tim Roberts, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
|
| _______________________________________________
| Render mailing list
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/render
--
Vadim Plessky
http://kde2.newmail.ru (English)
33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE
http://kde2.newmail.ru/kde_themes.html
KDE mini-Themes
http://kde2.newmail.ru/themes/
_______________________________________________
Render mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/render
