Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 23rd Jun 2009 21:40 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces The Engineering 7 weblog has an item about the improvements made in the ClearType font rendering technology which has been included in Windows since Windows XP. While I won't go too deeply into that post, I did figure it was a good opportunity to talk about font antialiasing in general; which type do you prefer?
Permalink for comment 369953
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Depends on the application
by jjezabek on Tue 23rd Jun 2009 22:41 UTC
Member since:

When used in UIs - readability is the most important thing. But of course this has lots of drawbacks, e.g. a 8 point Times New Roman/Helvetica looks totally different than a 9 or 10 point version of the same font. It has different weight, spacing, etc. This is of course a problem in word processing and (even more) DTP applications - to get a feeling of how the printed text will look like, you have to zoom it 2 or 3 times.

Btw. grid-fitting is done on all major platforms. Also on Windows it's not only used by Cleartype (the renderer with sub-pixel precision), it's even more critical when using normal antialiasing or no antialiasing at all. On Mac OS X the edges are a bit more blurry and the font looks a bit heavier, but IMO this does not affect readability adversely. With FreeType the results are very close to Windows - hinted TrueType fonts look almost identical using both renderers (when the patented grid-fitting code is enabled).

Reply Score: 2