On Thursday 22 August 2002 12:31 am, Dustin Norlander wrote: | I very much agree with Marcus, hinting is NOT worth the effort. Consider | that hinting is really only absolutely necessary at font sizes less then | 24 (excluding <5 which are going to be illegible no matter what). | Embedding bitmaps is much easier. For my most recently released font ( | http://www.dustismo.com/fonts/Dustismo.zip ) I spent about 5 weeks | designing the glyphs, then I spent about a month trying to properly hint | ONE character and I finally gave up and embedded bitmaps for sizes 7-22
Have you tried to hint it using TrueType OpCodes? Or PS Hints? Which software you have used? | which took about a month. It looks quit nice on my windows machine (it - | of course - looks like crap on linux). The guy who did times new roman Why you are so *negative* about Linux? | said he spent two years on the hinting alone, consider he could have | embedded bitmaps for the same result and probably 1/30 the time. Interesting. Do you know that guy in person, or have some URL with more info? Peter Karow estimates time to hint Latin alphabet as: * 72 hours for TrueType * 2 hours for PS Type1 format Your statement above just confirms this numbers, IMO. We should go to *PostScript* hinting model (not TrueType one!) | | If anyone here has actually tried to properly hint a font I think they | will agree that it is a most frustrating endeavor. | Yes, I do it almost every day (when have time)! And it's a lot of fun fro me. ;-)) In what aspects of hinting you are exactly interested? | | Thanks | Dustin | cheapskatefonts.com | | At 05:52 PM 8/21/2002 +0100, you wrote: | >Another quick discussion related to font file format philosophy: | > | > Is hinting really worth the effort? | > | >Font file formats (even scalable ones) in principle ought to be | >relatively simple creatures. The only aspect that really adds enormous | >amounts of complexity, both with regard to the development of the | >renderer as well as with regard to the creation of the fonts, is the | >automated control point adjustment based on hinting information. Is that | >type of scale-independent hinting really a good idea in the long run? | > | >I'd like to argue that this is not necessarily the case, and would be | >interested in hearing your more generic insights and opinions into the | >subjects. | > | >Main points: | > | > - Even entry-level printing devices have now reached pixel sizes | > of 20 �m or less, and many use in addition non-binary pixel | > values for anti-aliasing, such that the changes of up to half a | > pixel width to the outline when hinting is applied really does | > not affect visible quality any more in printouts. | > | > - For DTP applications, it is important that the on-screen | > representation approximates as closely as possible the printed | > result in a device-independent way, and hinting severely interferes with | > that goal as it changes glyph spacings and sizes. | [snip] -- 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/ _______________________________________________ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
