[ Ales here, I'm reposting this since majordomo didn't recognize the e-mail as being subscribed to the geda-dev/geda-user mailinglist. ]
-- Cut here -- Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:54:40 -0600 From: Mark Rages <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If you want to make logos and such, you can use my hacked version of pstoedit: http://mlug.missouri.edu/~markrages/software/pstoedit_additions I used Inkscape to design my logo and printed to ps, then used the "pcbfill" option in pstoedit to make a pcb layer. It would be possible to use a similar process to generate new fonts, I think. But I am happy with the PCB fonts for ref designators and such. Regards, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:51:06 -0200, Xtian Xultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Em Qui 16 Dez 2004 11:49, Stephen Meier escreveu: > > Xtian, > > > > I think the problem with fonts for pcb is the need to generate gerber > > file output. The next statement could be completely invallid because I > > am no way near an expert. Gerber files use apetures to shine light > > through. Lines are easy because you can make a circle and move the > > circle with the light on. For quality text characters you would need to > > generate an apeture for each character, for each font and for each point > > size that you use. I don't know if gerber files have a maximum number of > > apatures or not. > > > > Best Whishes, > > > > Steve Meier > > > > Xtian Xultz wrote: > > >Hello all > > > > > >Sorry if my question is silly. The font that gschem produces in the sheets > > > are very nice, I like it a lot. But the font that PCB generates, IMHO, is > > > very ugly. As far as I know, they use completely diferent way to do it., > > > PCB have a file with the fonts made just by lines. I am trying to make > > > another set of letters for PCB, but didnt find a good way to do it, but I > > > am trying. My question is, is it possible to incorporate in the code of > > > PCB the same way that gschem use to generate the caracters, and stuff? Or > > > is it possible to use a library like freetype to make it? > > I understand now, thak you very much! >
