[Devel] QA: latest FT2 snapshot & Serif fonts

[Vadim Plessky]

I compiled latest  FT2 snaphot (March 20,2003) and tested it againt few Serif 
fonts.
To be sure that we are speaking about same test pattern, I used text from 
David Turner screenshots/example (from salon.com)
I should tell you here that quality of rendering of non-hinted font (TTF with 
autohinter, no bytecode interpreter compiled) improved significantly over 
FreeType 2.1.3.
And it seems that it was at expense of PS hinter/AA renderer.
Pls check attached HTML example. At 11pt and 10pt, quality of rendering for 
all  fonts (1- Times New Roman TTF, 2- my PFB, and 3- Nimbus Roman No 9 PFB) 
is about the same.
But at 9pt, there are significant differences.
Times New Roman (TNR) TTF looks like sharp and consistant, while two other 
fonts have problem with rendering of 'e' (blurred top part withot hole) and 
'a' (too wide) - see screenshot atatched.
Check word 'entertainment' - all artefacts are very well visible.
There are some artefacts for TNR rendering, too.
Check word 'aggressively' - bottom of 'g' is not closed.

Then I played with TNR - I converted TTF to PS Type1, and tested that font.
And result was quite interesting: converted TNR had the same problem as Nimbus 
Roman and my font, top part of 'e' didn't have hole and font lost contrast.

So, I am wonderig wether it's posisble to fix this?
This is the last artefact which IMO annoys rendering of Serif fonts.
If this is fixed - I guess long-time discussion about TTF vs. PS fonts can be 
stopped, and there would be no reason to compile bytecode interpreter or 
create "patent-free" interpreter.

P.S. my font is available for testing upon request.
-- 

Best Regards,

Vadim Plessky
SVG Icons * BlueSphere Icons 0.3.0 released
http://svgicons.sourceforge.net

serif-ft214-9pt.png
Description: PNG image

Font size: 11pt

Consumers of entertainment have long taken advantage of whatever technology is at hand to make copies of their favorite obsessions. Likewise, content creators have long struggled to resist this tendency. Copyright law, originally intended to balance the needs of both consumers and producers, existed in a middle ground between the two sides. But the advent of the Internet, which makes copying anything digital, anywhere, absurdly easy, vastly increased the stakes of the struggle. In response, the content companies have used their lobbying clout to aggressively redefine copyright law in their own interest.

Consumers of entertainment have long taken advantage of whatever technology is at hand to make copies of their favorite obsessions. Likewise, content creators have long struggled to resist this tendency. Copyright law, originally intended to balance the needs of both consumers and producers, existed in a middle ground between the two sides. But the advent of the Internet, which makes copying anything digital, anywhere, absurdly easy, vastly increased the stakes of the struggle. In response, the content companies have used their lobbying clout to aggressively redefine copyright law in their own interest.

Consumers of entertainment have long taken advantage of whatever technology is at hand to make copies of their favorite obsessions. Likewise, content creators have long struggled to resist this tendency. Copyright law, originally intended to balance the needs of both consumers and producers, existed in a middle ground between the two sides. But the advent of the Internet, which makes copying anything digital, anywhere, absurdly easy, vastly increased the stakes of the struggle. In response, the content companies have used their lobbying clout to aggressively redefine copyright law in their own interest.

Font size: 10pt

Consumers of entertainment have long taken advantage of whatever technology is at hand to make copies of their favorite obsessions. Likewise, content creators have long struggled to resist this tendency. Copyright law, originally intended to balance the needs of both consumers and producers, existed in a middle ground between the two sides. But the advent of the Internet, which makes copying anything digital, anywhere, absurdly easy, vastly increased the stakes of the struggle. In response, the content companies have used their lobbying clout to aggressively redefine copyright law in their own interest.

Consumers of entertainment have long taken advantage of whatever technology is at hand to make copies of their favorite obsessions. Likewise, content creators have long struggled to resist this tendency. Copyright law, originally intended to balance the needs of both consumers and producers, existed in a middle ground between the two sides. But the advent of the Internet, which makes copying anything digital, anywhere, absurdly easy, vastly increased the stakes of the struggle. In response, the content companies have used their lobbying clout to aggressively redefine copyright law in their own interest.

Consumers of entertainment have long taken advantage of whatever technology is at hand to make copies of their favorite obsessions. Likewise, content creators have long struggled to resist this tendency. Copyright law, originally intended to balance the needs of both consumers and producers, existed in a middle ground between the two sides. But the advent of the Internet, which makes copying anything digital, anywhere, absurdly easy, vastly increased the stakes of the struggle. In response, the content companies have used their lobbying clout to aggressively redefine copyright law in their own interest.

Font size: 9pt

Consumers of entertainment have long taken advantage of whatever technology is at hand to make copies of their favorite obsessions. Likewise, content creators have long struggled to resist this tendency. Copyright law, originally intended to balance the needs of both consumers and producers, existed in a middle ground between the two sides. But the advent of the Internet, which makes copying anything digital, anywhere, absurdly easy, vastly increased the stakes of the struggle. In response, the content companies have used their lobbying clout to aggressively redefine copyright law in their own interest.

Consumers of entertainment have long taken advantage of whatever technology is at hand to make copies of their favorite obsessions. Likewise, content creators have long struggled to resist this tendency. Copyright law, originally intended to balance the needs of both consumers and producers, existed in a middle ground between the two sides. But the advent of the Internet, which makes copying anything digital, anywhere, absurdly easy, vastly increased the stakes of the struggle. In response, the content companies have used their lobbying clout to aggressively redefine copyright law in their own interest.

Consumers of entertainment have long taken advantage of whatever technology is at hand to make copies of their favorite obsessions. Likewise, content creators have long struggled to resist this tendency. Copyright law, originally intended to balance the needs of both consumers and producers, existed in a middle ground between the two sides. But the advent of the Internet, which makes copying anything digital, anywhere, absurdly easy, vastly increased the stakes of the struggle. In response, the content companies have used their lobbying clout to aggressively redefine copyright law in their own interest.