[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Freetype] PS Type1 vs. TrueType
[Freetype] PS Type1 vs. TrueType
Fri, 13 Jul 2001 14:41:17 +0000
On Friday 13 July 2001 09:39, David Turner wrote:
| Hi Werner,
| Werner LEMBERG a écrit :
| > > Because Windows uses a table embedded in the font, named "gasp", that
| > > gives thresholds where anti-aliasing and smoothing should be toggled.
| > >
| > > Use of this table is patented by Mircrosoft, by the way !!
| > > (but you can still use one that is outside the font without trouble).
| > Really? Details, please. BTW, it would be a good idea to mention
| > this on the patents page...
| Here's a link to the patent's description:
| After review, it seems that it applies even if the "gasp" table isn't
| stored in the font file. !! I need to dive in the claim details though
| to be certain. I'm also confident that some of these contradict at least
| two other patents so also cover so-called "gray-level processing of
| grid fitted glyphs"..
| Oh, oh, I wonder if this means new shit on the radar ???
Is "PostScript Type1" rendering is free of such *surprises*?
I found that with recent FreeType release, FT 2.0.3, and AA enabled (in
XFree86), rendering quality of Type1 fonts is very good.
So, may be it's time to use Type1 fonts instead of TrueType?
Are there any patents surrounding rendering of Type1 fonts?
I was trying to recall why I stopped using Type1 fonts. To be correct, I have
tried to recall why I was *never* using Type1 fonts running Windows.
(I am running Linux from Aug.2000, while I was Windows user since 1989-1990)
Explantations are very simple:
- Adobe Type Manager costs money, and it is more than $100 (ATM Deluxe) with
good selection of fonts.
- there were no good Cyrillic fonts (1993-1995) available in Type1 format,
with good hinting. Adobe never localized ATM for Russian market, so it was
really not an option at all.
At a moment:
- *free* Type1 rasterizer is part of XFree86, Type1 fonts supported by
- URW fonts, part of GhostScript distribution, are of rather good quality.
They are limited to Latin-1 and Latin-2 encodings, but it's better than
nothing. At leats, those fonts are free and do not require licensing.
-there are some Cyrillic fonts available nowdays, and it's possible to hint
them for better rendering quality.
Well, Type1 will not find its way to Windows (already...), but there are good
opportunities on Linux/UNIX'es. I found that hinting process for Type1 fonts
is much more simple than for TrueType, and it can be done (even by one
person) in realistic timeframe.
What do you think about this?
Does TrueType have some advantages over Type1, especially when you *disabled*
TrueType Bytecode interpreter (due to patent issues...) ?
| - David
| Render mailing list
33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE
Do you have Arial font installed? Just test it!
- [Freetype] Re: Arial ttf - bad rendering of some glyphs, Pedriana, Paul, 2001/07/12
- [Freetype] Re: Arial ttf - bad rendering of some glyphs, David Turner, 2001/07/12
- [Freetype] Re: [Render] Re: Arial ttf - bad rendering of some glyphs, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/07/12
- [Freetype] Re: [Render] Re: Arial ttf - bad rendering of some glyphs, David Turner, 2001/07/13
- [Freetype] PS Type1 vs. TrueType,
Vadim Plessky <=
- [Freetype] Re: [Render] PS Type1 vs. TrueType, Francesco Zappa Nardelli, 2001/07/13
- [Freetype] Re: [Render] PS Type1 vs. TrueType, Vadim Plessky, 2001/07/13
- [Freetype] Re: [Render] PS Type1 vs. TrueType, David Turner, 2001/07/13
- Re: [Freetype] Re: [Render] PS Type1 vs. TrueType, Vadim Plessky, 2001/07/13
- [Freetype] Re: PS Type1 vs. TrueType, David Turner, 2001/07/13
- Re: [Freetype] Re: PS Type1 vs. TrueType, Vadim Plessky, 2001/07/13
- [Freetype] ATM Light (was Re: PS Type1 vs. TrueType), Leonard Rosenthol, 2001/07/14
- Re: [Freetype] ATM Light (was Re: PS Type1 vs. TrueType), Vadim Plessky, 2001/07/15
- Re: [Fonts]Re: [Freetype] Re: PS Type1 vs. TrueType, Roozbeh Pournader, 2001/07/17
- Re: [Freetype] Re: PS Type1 vs. TrueType, Juliusz Chroboczek, 2001/07/14