2009/11/30 Michal Suchanek <hramr...@centrum.cz>: > 2009/11/30 Qianqian Fang <fan...@gmail.com>: >> Michal Suchanek wrote: >>> >>> Aestetics is relative but uniform stroke width is not. >>> >>> Yes, I suspected it would not be a common character, my character >>> table does not list a meaning for it. >>> >>> However, similar issue can be seen with the 刀 character in the >>> microhei_24px and microhei_32px rasterization. In fact, the stroke >>> width is almost inverted in these two rasterizations although they are >>> supposedly the same font. >>> >> >> I agree with you that the CJK autohinter is far from perfect. >> It does a much worse job in smaller sizes. > > If it does decent job on larger font sizes then perhaps we could > render a large enough font and rely on bitmap fonts for smaller sizes. > > I guess I should also install some more fonts and try to convert them > to bitmap in Fontforge. >
I tried rasterizing Arphic fonts in Fontforge and I am disappointed. First, fontforge sucks at this kind of task. There is no reasonable way to select multiple glyphs, save a Unicode range. You can choose them one by one or drag by mouse. The semantic of drag operation is different on selected and non-selected glyphs. Pressing Esc to get out of menu or clicking somewhere deselects the glyphs again with no way of re-selecting the glyphs I was working with. Terrible user interface. The results of rasterization are also disappointing. The UMingTW font seems somewhat reasonable at 48 and 64 px (but not 52 px so it's probably just a matter of skimming through more glyphs to find some examples of terrible rasterization). In UKaiTW there is no problem with the 刀 character because its strokes are slanted enough to not get turned into a line with width-stepping but there is a problem with 口 and similar glyphs. The problem are near-vertical or near-horizontal lines that get rasterized quite poorly. Glyphs with multiple vertical or horizontal strokes often get strokes of different widths because some of the strokes get rasterized on the pixel boundary while others do not. The same issues can be seen in the outline view without antialiasing, and antialiasing greatly improves the glyph shapes, and at least for me it improves readability as well. So to me rasterizing to bitmaps looks like a dead end. We either need grayscale support or vector support or take only the limited set of fonts which are manually drawn as bitmaps. Thanks Michal _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
