Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeType 2.7 Released With A Big Font Rendering Change

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by Cerberus View Post
    I hope Ubuntu will keep their own font rendering patches as Ubuntu font rendering is the best among Linux distributions, better than Windows font rendering as well, when I test other Linux distributions I always install Infinality font rendering patches and set to OSX preset to get acceptable looking fonts.
    Infinality would be version "38" if I have picked it up correctly. The type of font also seems to matter and newer fonts render better than older ones. Some fonts have been tuned over the years for certain render engines, which will also show (positively as well as negatively). So it will take some time getting used to it and finding decent fonts. I am assuming this has already happened with Ubuntu and other distros will need to fine-tune their settings, too.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by sdack View Post
      The JPEG conversion ruins it a bit... Here is the original link: http://i.imgur.com/rH52AZY.png
      Y'all are nuts the 2.7 looks much better (to me). The old 2.6 looks like it's squeezed together and blocky while 2.7 looks rounder with more natural spacing. I'm not saying the spacing actually changed as I think it's just my perception of it has with the more round characters in 2.7.

      Comment


      • #23
        Yeah, it's probably different for HiDPI, but at "normal DPI" the older renderer looks much better to me. New one looks blurry as others have said.

        Comment


        • #24
          Yeah, I have been testing it since 2.6.5 was released. It looks like crap on normal 96dpi screens. Its is only an improvement on HiDPI screens.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by carewolf View Post
            Yeah, I have been testing it since 2.6.5 was released. It looks like crap on normal 96dpi screens. Its is only an improvement on HiDPI screens.
            Or to be more specific. It makes well-designed fonts look like average designed fonts, but it does make terrible designed fonts look average as well. Which means it is an improvement for most online web-fonts, but a downgrade for typical high-end system fonts and especially programmer's mono-type fonts.

            Comment


            • #26
              Ubuntu is not affected in any way because they never used the old interpreter, just the autohinter. Different part of the code. You will only see v40 if you use "full" or "medium" hinting (same thing). Ubuntu has been using "slight" since forever.

              The comparison sdack posted is the intended result. It's only blurry because your brain isn't accustomed to it.

              The RGBA setting turns subpixel rendering on. This is a compile-time option that is only enabled in Ubuntu and Debian by default I think. Maybe Arch? You need it for improved contrast/sharpness.

              It looks like crap on normal 96dpi screens. Its is only an improvement on HiDPI screens.
              From my perspective, it's fine on either. Ubuntu has been using an even softer method of hinting for years and their users seem to be mostly fine with it

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by mudig View Post
                Ubuntu is not affected in any way because they never used the old interpreter, just the autohinter. Different part of the code. You will only see v40 if you use "full" or "medium" hinting (same thing). Ubuntu has been using "slight" since forever.

                The comparison sdack posted is the intended result. It's only blurry because your brain isn't accustomed to it.

                The RGBA setting turns subpixel rendering on. This is a compile-time option that is only enabled in Ubuntu and Debian by default I think. Maybe Arch? You need it for improved contrast/sharpness.


                From my perspective, it's fine on either. Ubuntu has been using an even softer method of hinting for years and their users seem to be mostly fine with it
                I think I just prefer fonts sharp than shape accurate. Especially the monospace fonts I look at all day. I used the v40 for a week, and it was acceptable, it improved the terrible fonts people use online, and was a wash with most fonts I had. It was just the really good well-hinted fonts that suffered, the fonts that I have specifically been using for sharp text when coding.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by mudig View Post
                  The comparison sdack posted is the intended result. It's only blurry because your brain isn't accustomed to it.
                  Yep, any slight change to font rendering can really throw you off for a while.

                  Same thing happened on Windows when browsers started using the Direct2D accelerated fonts - everyone complained that they were too fuzzy, and yet a year later everyone had forgotten about it and thought the old fonts looked like crap.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Fonts and rendering of fonts are personal preference... looking at pictures my 10/10 eyes tells me that this is shit

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      To me, freetype+infinality, with the standard infinality config (not osx or anything else), looks better than anything else I've ever seen, including Windows's directwrite/cleartype bullshit and Ubuntu. Windows fonts look horrible in comparison; hurt my eyes.

                      So, to the freetype devs trying to imitate Windows behaviour, I will say: no, thank you, I will stick to my infinality. Maybe you should merge that instead.

                      Have fun.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X