From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <9front-bounces@9front.inri.net>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,VISTA_COST
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: from 9front.inri.net (9front.inri.net [107.161.22.3])
	by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA26E223FB
	for <ml@inbox.vuxu.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:09:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: from wopr.sciops.net ([216.126.196.60]) by 9front; Mon Jan 20 05:08:20 -0500 2025
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sciops.net; s=20210706;
	t=1737367695;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=jWnhjJC8yUJG90cBzhoNY+2G/iGy25ExVjUBBacpqJE=;
	b=N6Ts5uLUow6cStiP8ZdTvu6wXea7Txyva9tRHQzhirWhGDuAgYTqtjeXB/oMPDSvbA4wYn
	1zemQBmRRV6YDbw8pk/tO9kl5AhHWS4wqI7FfEyinby5Bt88Aoh5tcl4pm7BuuhV0kpNji
	rmvCOPYagyVTRoGKUvPbmdBygRmeNX8=
Received: 
	by wopr.sciops.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id e831f672 (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305:256:NO)
	for <9front@9front.org>;
	Mon, 20 Jan 2025 02:08:14 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <8FDDCFF9AACCFA5A4C1B22EAAF65DD0A@wopr.sciops.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:08:14 +0100
From: qwx@sciops.net
To: 9front@9front.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-ID: <9front.9front.org>
List-Help: <http://lists.9front.org>
X-Glyph: ➈
X-Bullshit: package content-driven realtime solution 
Subject: Re: [9front] Truetypefs anti-aliasing
Reply-To: 9front@9front.org
Precedence: bulk

> I posted this earlier on 9fans, but I should do it here:
> I've made a modification to truetypefs to do what ttfrender does: render
> the font at higher resolution and filter down to a good looking 8 bit font.
> 
> This is a significant improvement in the appearance of the fonts from
> truetypefs, as seen in the image below.  Left is the one-bit font, right is
> the filtered font.
> [image: image.png]
> I've attached the change, and I have questions.
> I believe in being opinionated: the 8 bit version is so much better for
> every font I've compared that I don't see any use for the 1 bit versions
> anymore.
> How do other users feel about ditching the 1 bit code path and having only
> the 8 bit code path?  This is the cleanest/smallest change.
> The alternatives would be to have a switch to truetypefs so that it always
> returns either 1 bit or 8 bit fonts; a switch in the fs setup to choose
> based on font size; a way to tell the fs what font depth to return
> (probably a hack like the font size now, very ugly).
> The cost of the filtering is low in compute for smaller point sizes, but
> starts to lag a bit at 30 point or so.  It probably also blurs out very
> small sizes.  I don't know that anyone chooses TrueType fonts for text
> under ~10pt however.
> [image: image.png]
> Thoughts?
> Paul

I support this as well, though is there perhaps a different algorithm
to use for the filtering?  It does look a bit blurry.

Thanks,
qwx