>> if you ask FontForge for B/W rasterization it uses FreeType in v35
>> mode. In other words, the rasterization results returned by
>> FontForge in this case are *identical* to what ft2-demo returns.
>
> I happened to be cleaning up my github account lately - so I have an
> up-to-date clone
On Monday, 18 May 2020, 05:30:58 GMT+1, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> if you ask FontForge for B/W rasterization it uses FreeType in v35
> mode. In other words, the rasterization results returned by FontForge
> in this case are *identical* to what ft2-demo returns.
Hi Werner,
I happened to be
Hin-Tak,
> There is a bilevel mode in ft2-demo, and you can also switch to v35
> to match Microsoft better in ft2-demo, from the default v40. I told
> you so, many emails ago, in my first reply.
>
> If you feel that you know fontforge and freetype well enough to tell
> which is fontforge and
That's actually great feedback, thanks Piotr, we'll have a look.
Le dim. 17 mai 2020 à 20:47, Alexei Podtelezhnikov a
écrit :
> >> From the image, it is evident that both FreeType and TD renderer (my
> own renderer that relies on FreeType but uses my own rasterizer,
>
On Monday, 18 May 2020, 02:38:24 GMT+8, piotrunio-2...@wp.pl
wrote:
> > You showed a few fontforge-generated screenshots, which shows good
> > agreement between fontforge and Microsoft rendering. If you think they are
> > not good enough, fontforge's github tracker is the place to report
>> From the image, it is evident that both FreeType and TD renderer (my own
>> renderer that relies on FreeType but uses my own rasterizer,
>> https://typedesign.netlify.app/tdrenderer.html) are extremely glitchy. It is
>> very important to take research into TrueType rendering to properly
You showed a few fontforge-generated screenshots, which shows good agreement
between fontforge and Microsoft rendering. If you think they are not good
enough, fontforges github tracker is the place to report it. Its by
no means a good agreement because its not pixel-for-pixel identical. In
On Sunday, 17 May 2020, 14:34:17 GMT+8, piotrunio-2...@wp.pl
wrote:
> That's not an excuse not to fix the FreeType bugs. The FreeType guys should
> not focus on my software and instead fix their own bugs.
> I do not intend to ask for any help, I'm already working on fixing the TD
> renderer
Le jeu. 14 mai 2020 à 20:35, piotrunio-2...@wp.pl a
écrit :
> The standard ppem of the test font is: 16
> The standard string of the test font is: !"#$%
>
> From the image, it is evident that both FreeType and TD renderer (my own
> renderer that relies on FreeType but uses my own rasterizer,
>
> I fixed some bugs in a development version, which would make the 2.0
> version of TD renderer significantly more accurate than 1.0.
>
> https://i.imgur.com/oKDg7F1.png
>
> I also made sure to research how dropout control works and implement
> much more accurate rules than in TD renderer 1.0.
> I fixed some bugs in a development version, which would make the 2.0 version
> of TD renderer significantly more accurate than 1.0.
> https://i.imgur.com/oKDg7F1.png
You might.have tried the recent FreeType but you didn’t have to.
> I also made sure to research how dropout control works and
No, its evident that both are glitchy. You cant arbitrary say
one renderer but not the other does it quite well when both have many
errors. They are both extremely glitchy, and thats exactly the
implementation nightmare. There is an international agreed ISO standard,
ISO 14496-22,
On Sat, 16 May 2020 at 05:32, piotrunio-2...@wp.pl
wrote:
> It is very important to take research into TrueType rendering to properly
simulate the Microsoft bilevel renderer because it would help render fonts
correctly.
That is excellent piece of advice. So it seems that you know what you need
On Saturday, 16 May 2020, 11:32:19 GMT+8, piotrunio-2...@wp.pl
wrote:
> > I am not sure what you are trying to say here or trying to do. Your own
> > program is buggy - so go fix it. As I mentioned twice already - we are on
> > reasonable friendly terms with the Microsoft folks, and
Please include freetype-devel in all following discussions. Or stop posting.
There are official demos which allows you to change modes. They are in the
ft2-demos repo. Many linux distros bundle them as freetype-devel or
freetype-tools. Fontforge is not freetype.
I am not sure what you are
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 2:35 PM piotrunio-2...@wp.pl
wrote:
>
> The standard ppem of the test font is: 16
> The standard string of the test font is: !"#$%
Frankly, your image shows amazing consistency between FreeType and
GDI. You are right that BW rasterizers have complex rules, each of
which
About my 2nd point - you did not get it: fontforge is not freetype. If you
want freetype to imitate Microsoft's bilevel rendering, please do as I
suggested. Fontforge does not have a mode of "use freetype to imitate
Microsoft's rendering", afaik. Use v35 and set rendering mode to mono.
As for
> The standard ppem of the test font is: 16 The standard string of the test
> font is: !"#$% From the image, it is evident that both FreeType and TD
> renderer (my own renderer that relies on FreeType but uses my own rasterizer,
> typedesign.netlify.app typedesign.netlify.app ) are
18 matches
Mail list logo
