Re: [ft] unhappy about recent "light" changes

[apodtele]

It is better. It, however, feels like all spacings increased. Do you
still use left-side-bearing and right-side-bearing? Are they updated
as a result of these glyph translations? They should be, right?

On 1/26/07, David Turner <address@hidden> wrote:
> OK, please try the current CVS, I've made some improvements to advance
> width computations. However, there is an inherent conflict between
> ideal spacing and reducing the blurness.
>
> Frankly, I don't know if this new light hinting algorithm will be in
> the next release; if too many complain about it, I'll move it to a new
> hinting mode (hurray for more options, and all the associated changes
> to the rest of the graphics stack !!)
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> - David Turner
> - The FreeType Project  (www.freetype.org)
>
>
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 08:14:25 -0500, address@hidden said:
> > Before it's too late, I would like to complain that spacing between
> > the glyphs has become much worse in recent CVS. See the attached
> > snaps.
> >
> > - "po" "pe" now touch each other
> > - "ra" much closer now
> > -  "op" too far
> >
> > The snapshots are Verdana.
> > In DejaVu-Sans even stems have uneven widths. Bluriness hides a lot of
> > imprefections.
> > Oh well.


--
Alexei A. Podtelezhnikov, PhD