Thank you Pedro,

Please report all the information to the bug system (file a new report if 
needed). Assign it to me.


On Mar 5, 2014, at 5:39 PM, Pedro Duque Vieira <> 

> 1. It doesn't appear to be related with that issue but than again, it might..
> 3. Thank you very much! I'll try out those settings to see how it looks. I'm 
> not very familinar with the internals of how windows renders fonts but IMHO I 
> would think that such poor results should be possible to avoid even with 
> default settings.
> c) When you say 80, you mean 80px right? Even at 42px the results are quite 
> poor.
> d) That's not the case, but I'll double check, just in case.
> e) That's not the case.
> To answer your question: no, it looks bad both in windows 7 and windows 8 
> (8.1).
> Before submitting the bug I think it's better for me to double check if it's 
> not my computer's fault that the results are so poor because as I said I 
> don't know much about the font rendering internals of windows, but as my 
> computer has a 1900x1200 display (slightly superior than full hd) I would 
> expect much better results using the system font (Segoe UI). Like I said even 
> at 42px, using the system font, the results are very poor (you can attest to 
> that by looking at the screenshots in my blog - pixelduke).
> Thanks again, regards,
> 1.
> Maybe
> 2.
> Sure. The above bug is in my TODO list as a matter of fact,
> 3. Things to try:
> a) Text#setFontSmoothingType(LCD) ?
> b)  -Dprism.text=t2k (in the command line)
> c)  if the font size is bigger than 80 JavaFX renders text using paths, try 
> font size < 80 (so that glyph images are used)
> d) make sure the text node does not lay in a transparent cached parent, or 
> any other type node that is internally rendered using intermediate 
> transparent texture. See for 
> details.
> e) if the node is cached (with or without background set), make sure the node 
> is not scaled up.
> Question to you, does it look good on Windows 7 and bad on Windows 8 ?
> Please, use the jira to report results.
> Thank you
> Felipe
> -- 
> Pedro Duque Vieira

Reply via email to