On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 02:05:00PM +1000, Russell Shaw wrote: > >Subpixel only works on LCDs, which produce ugly output. > > I think sub-pixel rendering also works for a crt, but a sudden change > in pixel value (such as the edge of a black square on a white background) > is smeared (convolved with the step response of analog electronics > bandwidth) > into a few pixels on the crt. It shouldn't make sharpness any worse.
No, this is absolutely incorrect. Subpixel is fundamentally impossible on a CRT because the CRT's rgb cells have nothing to do with the video card's idea of "pixel". You can enable it and the degree to which it looks bad will depend on a lot of factors, but it's most certainly not doing what subpixel is intended to do. > > Also it does > >not give more vertical resolution which is actually what's needed in > >certain scripts for small fonts to look good. > > It does give the effect of extra vertical resolution. No it does not. If you claim this you should back it up with an explanation. > The effect is that > of a small amount of sub-pixel antialiasing, making sloping lines look > less jaggered. Yes, sloping lines. This is because the increase in resolution is horizontal, not vertical. > With a black edge on a white background, sub-pixel rendering > makes the individual r/g/b sub-pixels go from > 100%(white)->67%->33%->0%(black). > Full-pixel anti-aliasing is what really wrecks the sharpness and darkness > of a glyph. It sounds like everything you're saying comes from a very vague understanding from a user standpoint rather than knowing what the terms actually mean and what they do.. Rich -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
