Re: [ft-devel] FT_Outline_Embolden() is Blurry
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Infinality infinal...@infinality.net wrote: Well, I can agree with you that it may not be the proper spot for doing the rounding; I just can't imagine why anybody would ever want it to appear the way it does now unless no hinting is being used at all. If you think that rounding the emboldening strength is sufficient, you must assume that the original outline is already well hinted, which is just wrong. There is no way you can shortcut the hinting like that. On 06/16/2012 10:07 PM, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote: On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Infinality infinal...@infinality.net wrote: Sorry to resurrect an old thread here, but I think I have a solution that preserves the addition of Y-weight at larger font sizes, while still keeping the blur to a minimum: In FT_Outline_Embolden (which is now FT_Outline_Embolden_XY), do this to ystrength: ystrength = FT_PIX_FLOOR ( ystrength ); This rounding belongs at a higher level. Nothing stops an enlightened user from properly rounding the strength before calling this function. There is no need to hard code this at the low level function or library. There may be a case to be made for this rounding in FT_GlyphSlot_Embolden. Even then I would argue that hinting belongs to hinting, it can follow the emboldening but should not be so invasive, ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] FT_Outline_Embolden() is Blurry
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Infinality infinal...@infinality.net wrote: Sorry to resurrect an old thread here, but I think I have a solution that preserves the addition of Y-weight at larger font sizes, while still keeping the blur to a minimum: In FT_Outline_Embolden (which is now FT_Outline_Embolden_XY), do this to ystrength: ystrength = FT_PIX_FLOOR ( ystrength ); This rounding belongs at a higher level. Nothing stops an enlightened user from properly rounding the strength before calling this function. There is no need to hard code this at the low level function or library. There may be a case to be made for this rounding in FT_GlyphSlot_Embolden. Even then I would argue that hinting belongs to hinting, it can follow the emboldening but should not be so invasive, ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] FT_Outline_Embolden() is Blurry
Well, I can agree with you that it may not be the proper spot for doing the rounding; I just can't imagine why anybody would ever want it to appear the way it does now unless no hinting is being used at all. On 06/16/2012 10:07 PM, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote: On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Infinality infinal...@infinality.net wrote: Sorry to resurrect an old thread here, but I think I have a solution that preserves the addition of Y-weight at larger font sizes, while still keeping the blur to a minimum: In FT_Outline_Embolden (which is now FT_Outline_Embolden_XY), do this to ystrength: ystrength = FT_PIX_FLOOR ( ystrength ); This rounding belongs at a higher level. Nothing stops an enlightened user from properly rounding the strength before calling this function. There is no need to hard code this at the low level function or library. There may be a case to be made for this rounding in FT_GlyphSlot_Embolden. Even then I would argue that hinting belongs to hinting, it can follow the emboldening but should not be so invasive, ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] FT_Outline_Embolden() is Blurry
Sorry to resurrect an old thread here, but I think I have a solution that preserves the addition of Y-weight at larger font sizes, while still keeping the blur to a minimum: In FT_Outline_Embolden (which is now FT_Outline_Embolden_XY), do this to ystrength: ystrength = FT_PIX_FLOOR ( ystrength ); Since the emboldening function uses 64 to equal ~1 pixel, rounding down to the nearest whole pixel removes the blur. Not sure if you're willing to implement this at this point, given that developers have the option of using the XY function, but wanted to mention it anyway. On 01/04/2012 01:54 AM, Werner LEMBERG wrote: The code has been written in a quite generic way. IMHO, you need both horizontal and vertical emboldening for larger font sizes. I fully agree that it is suboptimal for small font sizes which are going to be used in combination with other fonts. In my patches, I disable the y direction completely, and the aesthetic improvements are dramatic, in my opinion. Is this something that can be done in Freetype instead? Or perhaps can the function be split into two? It can't be done currently. Please suggest a new API. And provide a patch (with a ChangeLog entry) :-) Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] FT_Outline_Embolden() is Blurry
Another thought I had just after sending the last email... Consider any font that has a bold face available: Arial, DejaVu, Lucida Grande, etc.. Their bold faces do not end up being any taller than the regular, non-bold faces. So, the fact that FT_Outline_Embolden() is making the glyphs taller seems to go against common practice. ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] FT_Outline_Embolden() is Blurry
In ftoutln.c there is a function called FT_Outline_Embolden(). This is used to create artificial emboldening, and is used when fontconfig requests emboldening for fonts that don't have a bold face available. Near the end of this function are these two lines, which actually perform the emboldening, in the x and y directions: outline-points[n].x = v_cur.x + strength + in.x; outline-points[n].y = v_cur.y + strength + in.y; Emboldening in the y direction can happen in fractions of a pixel, and this ends up being only in the up direction. The result of this is a blurry fringe on the tops of letters. While this may be technically correct, I'm wondering if *anyone* actually thinks this looks nice. The code has been written in a quite generic way. IMHO, you need both horizontal and vertical emboldening for larger font sizes. I fully agree that it is suboptimal for small font sizes which are going to be used in combination with other fonts. In my patches, I disable the y direction completely, and the aesthetic improvements are dramatic, in my opinion. Is this something that can be done in Freetype instead? Or perhaps can the function be split into two? It can't be done currently. Please suggest a new API. And provide a patch (with a ChangeLog entry) :-) Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
