On Fri, 2001-12-14 at 03:37, Alex Larsson wrote: > On Thu, 13 Dec 2001, Moses Lei wrote: > > Another thing of note here is that the placement of the glyphs seem to be > slightly different. The Xft rendering seem to leave one pixel between each > glyph, while the Nautilus rendering doesn't leave any room between glyphs. > Well, perhaps fractions of a pixel... > > Perhaps this is due to Nautilus doing subpixel placement of glyphs before > AA and Xft only having integer glyph positions? Or they may just be > interpreting the metrics differently. I still think that before drawing any conclusions, you should make sure what hinter the used freetype lib uses. When nautilus does no hinting, and the Xft renderer does, then there are two cases: freetype uses the autohinter which (epecially in the case of a font with high quality hints like Arial) will result in much worse looking output (which could likely be worse than unhinted) than if freetype uses the full truetype interpreter (it a compile time question of freetype because of patent issues). I would argue that a hinted font in case two should be more readeable than an unhinted display. Unfortunately the example ong doesn´t show the output against the same background color, so this too could be missleading. jtl
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part