Coffeehouse Thread

13 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

The uggliest text you have ever seen.

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    GoddersUK

    Generic Forum Image

    The same PDF seen side by side, at aproximately the same zoom, in Firefox's new PDF viewer and in Adobe reader. Not how horrible the text (particularly the bold face text) is in Firefox. Did they not test this before releasing it?

    EDIT: Link to full size.

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    is this happening with multiple pdf files ??

     

  • User profile image
    GoddersUK

    @figuerres: Seems to (although it's most obvious in the one above that has the large section of bold type font). Interestingly that second PDF causes Firefox to display a banner saying it may not be properly supported. No idea why, it's a bog standard PDF that iirc was generated using Word 2007's built in PDF publisher.

    EDIT: Here's another that looks particularly bad.

    EDIT: They're fine if you zoom in, but I don't always want to read my PDFs zoomed in.

  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    When did Dean Hachamovitch start working on Firefoxes font rendering technoglogy?

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    androidi

    I did some experimentation. I'm still using IE8 because IE9+ text issues but may have found a solution.

    By using a good quality CRT (reads fine->) in 1600x1200, and then in windows 7 setting "make text and other items smaller/larges" control panels "Set custom size (DPI)" to 130% and selecting "Use Windows XP style DPI scaling", in the IE10 preview that I have installed text actually becomes much like GDI text. (Zoomed in 300% to look at the pixels for a font known to be unreadable in IE9/10 normally).

    Of course this means I don't quite get the full use of 1600x1200 and it looks more like something near 1280x1024 desktop, but atleast the text is quite readable and the only thing I'd like is a CRT with 3200x2400 resolution or more at maybe 25" size.

    The key here is that the DPI zoom % should be set so that the most commonly seen worst scenarios with IE9/10 font rendering actually become non-issue. Where normally at the default setting the "i" "l" "m" "h" etc have the vertical likes rendered with only blue and red color (seen easily zoomed in mspaint and just look fuzzy when not zoomed in), at around 130% zoom they start to be rendered mostly normally. I didn't test many cases though yet , just the couple worst cases I've seen.

  • User profile image
    androidi

    Oops. Just as I thought, so while one font at particular size may look ok with this 130% zoom, some others are nowhere near the IE8 clarity. So sticking with IE8...

    (In these comments I just looked at with the IE10 preview, there vertical lines are now 1 pixel column black and another red, so it just looks bad)

     

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    , androidi wrote

    I did some experimentation. I'm still using IE8 because IE9+ text issues but may have found a solution.

    By using a good quality CRT (reads fine->) in 1600x1200, and then in windows 7 setting "make text and other items smaller/larges" control panels "Set custom size (DPI)" to 130% and selecting "Use Windows XP style DPI scaling", in the IE10 preview that I have installed text actually becomes much like GDI text. (Zoomed in 300% to look at the pixels for a font known to be unreadable in IE9/10 normally).

    Of course this means I don't quite get the full use of 1600x1200 and it looks more like something near 1280x1024 desktop, but atleast the text is quite readable and the only thing I'd like is a CRT with 3200x2400 resolution or more at maybe 25" size.

    The key here is that the DPI zoom % should be set so that the most commonly seen worst scenarios with IE9/10 font rendering actually become non-issue. Where normally at the default setting the "i" "l" "m" "h" etc have the vertical likes rendered with only blue and red color (seen easily zoomed in mspaint and just look fuzzy when not zoomed in), at around 130% zoom they start to be rendered mostly normally. I didn't test many cases though yet , just the couple worst cases I've seen.

    what does this have to do with *FIREFOX* ??   the OP was talking about how FIREFOX does PDF files ?   are you lost or what am I missing in this reply ?

  • User profile image
    androidi

    @figuerres: Josh brought it up and I figured maybe he knows that this is due to same issue (DirectWrite), incase which the same solutions might apply. Incorrect assumption perhaps.

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    , androidi wrote

    @figuerres: Josh brought it up and I figured maybe he knows that this is due to same issue (DirectWrite), incase which the same solutions might apply. Incorrect assumption perhaps.

    The screenshot shown is Windows XP, which doesn't have DirectWrite.

  • User profile image
    GoddersUK

    , androidi wrote

    @figuerres: Josh brought it up and I figured maybe he knows that this is due to same issue (DirectWrite), incase which the same solutions might apply. Incorrect assumption perhaps.

    JoshRoss was joking Wink

  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    @GoddersUK: Some people... I'm not sure what is funnier, you explaining it, or the previous reaction. Anyways...

    I don't use Windows XP or Firefox, but I'm sure the original issue has nothing to do with Windows, Dean, Internet Explorer, CRTs, PDFs, or ClearType. There is most likely some setting, somewhere, that has disabled antialiasing for small font sizes.

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    JohnAskew

    Ah, crap, I was scrolling through text messages from my ex...

  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    @JohnAskew: One major problem with text messaging is that you can easily send the wrong person something really horrible. There was this lady at the office who received three days worth of the nastiest accusatory messages, in the end the person had the wrong phone number.

    It's one thing when the recipient has a name, it's another when they are just a number.

    -Josh

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.