Re: "Smooth" renderer completed

[Pavel Kankovsky]

On Tue, 4 Apr 2000, David Turner wrote:

>    I'd like to know if the "standard" rendering is too good to be forgotten,
>    or if you believe that this will not impact legibility ?

Having spent some time comparing both implementations, I think the
"smooth" rasterizer improves legibility in a great way (legible italic
minuscules 4 points high--cool!). In particular, there are no odd
misplaced (off by 1 pixel) or missing pieces of strokes I observed using
the "standard" rasterizer, and the thickness of strokes is more uniform.
Moreover, large glyphs look considerably smoother (esp. nearly horizontal
edges). I noticed some glyphs look a little bit more fuzzy and a few other
cases when the appearance was probably slighly worse that with the
"standard" rasterizer but I think those shortcoming are negligible.

--Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak  [ Boycott Microsoft--http://www.vcnet.com/bms ]
"Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation."