soulless / soul
>>107522203no
>>107522203What a retard-
>>107522203we need a better AA algorithm. glyphs get blurred in places that are not needed. we don't need blurry straight lines
>>107522203Can't even ironically support this nonsense.
>>107522203soulmaxxing
>disabling a feature that windows 98 included by default
>>107522203only if you have a high PPI monitor
Imagine not using at least a 4K display.
>>107522203First is sovl second is brokenSovl is whatever 14px Trebuchet MS is.
I use antialiasing in gzdoom
>>107522332This is the gayest a I’ve ever seen
>>107522317Windows has the best font AA for what you want at low DPI. It will reposition glyphs slightly to avoid blur but it means that the font doesn't scale up right when changing point size.Apple has the best for high DPI, but it looks blurry at low DPI.
>>107522203>dogshit linux rendering is soulloll
>>107522203am i the only one using bitmap fonts in firefox?
>>107522203Right is a vector font without smoothing, which isn't the same as an actual bitmapped font designed pixel by pixel.
>>107522317No, your monitor just needs four times the pixels in the same screen size
>>107522460the pleb fears the serif font
>>107522203gnome vs x11 thread, op is x11 user
Newer and better = bad. Older and worse = soul
>>107522337>>disabling a feature that windows 98 included by defaultOF COURSE. ClearType makes me puke.
>>107523638Unironically that is how [they] are. That's why ligatures exist in fonts.
>>107522203My bitmapped fonts which is better and 100% hardcoded using matrix array in HolyC for TempleOS
Low DPI display / High DPI displayIf your display is shit then of course anti-aliased fonts look like a blurry mess.
>>107522203antialiasing is for trannies
>>107522203Based. Fuck adding a bunch of multicolored blur to the screen for no reason whatsoever.
>NEW THING BAD OLD THING GOOD>[attaches the worst possible example of the old thing]>1000 + 4CHAN UPDOOTS
>>107522203easier to read
>>107522203We have to go -ack
>>107522203Anti-aliased > bitmapped >>>>> cleartype cancer
>>107525362https://www.dafont.com/04b-03.font
>>107525362le minecraft font, duuuuuuuuuuuuuuude
>>107525671what's the license for that? kinda want to use it in a pixel art game
>>107526389If you download the font from Dafont, you get a GIF file (attached) that says merely: "Freeware! You may use them as you like."HOWEVER, if you go to the author's website and use Google Translate on the Japanese "about" page, it says "noncommercial use only". http://www.dsg4.com/04/extra/bitmap/about.html
>>107526572Whoops, I forgot Google Translate accepts images nowadays.
i could be wrong, but the right 'a' doesn't look like a proper bitmap font, it looks like a vector typeface rendered without antialiasing.Windows up until XP (?) actually had, say, Times New Roman in bitmaps at DIFFERENT POINT SIZES. it's like pixel art where each individual pixel is intentional. Small Fonts that was just vectors called up and down would be mush.go into about:config in Firefox and set gfx.text.disable-aa to 'true'. restart it, check out some sites. it isn't as clean and crisp as on your 800x600 monitor back in the day (i don't even know if Windows HAS bitmap fonts now, even as a fallback).
>>107522332god i love the windows consolas font rendering it's so fucking readable linuxtroons will never ever come close to this proprietary trademarked patented technology
>>107522203Proper handmade bitmap fonts were kino.Truetype rendered without antialiasing is just garbage.
>>107523649Cleartype adjusted properly looks great. But it's ugly if it's on the wrong subpixel order or gamma adjustment. Mac font rendering is a blurry mess unless you throw stupidly many pixels at it.
>>107524555that's a nice font
Soulless / Soul
>>107528329I think you've got that the wrong way around.
>>107528329based>>107528427shut up
>>107522283>>107522314/threadBy the way retards, this thread was made by a botAnd yes I fell for it too
>>107528329fat fuck
>>107522203
>>107528329based
>>107528329normal readable letter: aunreadable onions letter: O
>>107528569I don't know why but I love geometric fonts like Futura
>>107522203So does "soul" just mean "shitty"?
>>107528329mature | childish
Any resources for proper font rendering in Qt and GTK?
>>107530091Do GDK_DEBUG=linear in GTK4 for proper font rendering.Dark mode strongly recommended.
>>107524555>1350x1013Blasphemy, that isn't the holy resolution!
>>107522203I'm using thishttps://int10h.org/blog/2020/12/more-font-updates-oldschool-pack-flexi-vga/#flexi-ibm-vga-v2-0With subpixel anti-aliasing and font hintingYou can seethe now.
>>107526710It's hinting not clear type that makes core windows fonts crisp but you're pseud retard with a prewritten opinion based on nothing and you're content with that, of course you are
>>107528329nice / gay
wait, is anti-aliasing just averaging neighboring pixels?
>>107530091adjust the font hinting strength (slight, medium, full) to your likingthat's about it. gtk4 doesn't support cleartype style subpixel rendering so using the default macos/android like grayscale is preferable.>>107530299>GDK_DEBUG=linearat that point just increase the font weight, ruining the gamma of applications isn't worth it for slightly bolder letters.
>>107530738It's not it's super-sampling rendered content and averages those. Sub-pixel anti-aliasing renders to virtual pixels on a higher resolution than native.Both techniques render more detail than naive rendering.Fags arguing against it dunning krugererd themselves.
>>107531062Does font antialiasing even supersample, or is it just taking pixels that an edge overlaps and figuring how much of the pixel is covered?
>>107531199That's still a form of supersampling. Numerical vs analytical integration.
>>107531226holy fricking amazeballs
>>107522203The bitmapped example has terrible hinting.
>>107526989You literally can't adjust ClearType properly. >But it's ugly if it's on the wrong subpixel order or gamma adjustment.Exactly, you can't even change subpixel ordering for example. >Mac font rendering is a blurry mess unless you throw stupidly many pixels at it.What has Mac to do with it? Just because the marketing name? It's literally a port of FreeType to Windows.
>>107526710You know that >>107522332 is on Linux, right?
>>107532030>You literally can't adjust ClearType properly. >Exactly, you can't even change subpixel ordering for example. Literally the first step of the ClearType tuning utility. The remaining steps are setting the gamma/weight.>Just because the marketing name? It's literally a port of FreeType to Windows.Ffs the name is going to make everybody think it's either for macOS or the Mac font renderer for Windows.
>>107532619>Literally the first step of the ClearType tuning utility.Yet you can't change something as simple as the subpixel ordering.
>>107526989>blurry mess unless you throw stupidly many pixels at it.Well, the higher the PPI the better it will look with even in Windows or Linux.>>107532030>Exactly, you can't even change subpixel ordering for example.>>107532649>Yet you can't change something as simple as the subpixel ordering.The main reason people think WOLED's have bad text rendering even though it's perfectly good on anything but ClearType.
>>107532649It does though. You're picking between RGB and BGR. If you have something other than these two, it's most likely high enough resolution that ClearType wouldn't give much if any visible benefit over plain grayscale antialiasing.
>>107532721See >>107532655>The main reason people think WOLED's have bad text rendering even though it's perfectly good on anything but ClearType.You can literally position individual pixels for font rendering in MacType by hand if you want to fine tune
