That 'vision' thing (Tuomas has a logo proposal)
tigert at gimp.org
Wed Nov 5 17:03:50 EET 2003
On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 16:43, Carl Worth wrote:
> On Nov 4, Keith Packard wrote:
> > One problem we've discovered with Gadget is that it is not well hinted, so
> > you get weird rendering artifacts if you don't hit one of the few sweet
> > pixel sizes (note the 'k' in the sample provided). We can obviously pick
> > a better size for the site logo, but that still leaves it looking ugly in
> > other environments, making it unsuitable for use within the web pages.
> Here's a rendering of the logo using hinted Gadget at a slightly
> larger size that seems to hit one of the hints' sweet-spots, (notice
> the 'k' and 'p' glyphs are no longer so distorted):
This looks fine to me. Much better indeed. We should replace the website
version with that bottom one.
> The path-based version is rendered at the same size for comparison.
> Personally, I prefer the hinted version much more for the web page.
> The existence of the path-based version does allow us to use it
> anywhere the font is not available or where the font hints would cause
> unacceptable artifacts.
The path version is what you really really really want to use for
printing, since there are just too many ways something can go wrong
between your workstation and the print press machine - and you end up
with 10000 paper sheets where the logo is printed with Helvetica..
Plus with large sizes and high DPI hinting doesnt make much sense
Tuomas Kuosmanen <tigert at gimp.org>
More information about the xdg