Hello guys,
once again a question from me ...
How you are satisfied with current font look in Fedora ? It is a blocker for daily work for you?
Well for me ... yes, fonts are blurry and it makes my eyes hurt. So even if i love fedora, i can not use it for daily work ...
Thanks,
D.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 1:59 PM, David Hláčik david@hlacik.eu wrote:
Hello guys,
once again a question from me ...
How you are satisfied with current font look in Fedora ? It is a blocker for daily work for you?
I have no problem with the fonts, maybe I'm just used to them. I use F9 almost exclusively, and computer work is a primary part of my job.
Peter
On Mon October 27 2008 4:59:10 pm David Hláčik wrote:
How you are satisfied with current font look in Fedora ? It is a blocker for daily work for you?
Well for me ... yes, fonts are blurry and it makes my eyes hurt. So even if i love fedora, i can not use it for daily work ...
I'd be willing to bet you don't have your machine's video resolution properly configured. Fonts are not blurry in Fedora, at least not on any of many, many machines that I've built.
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:17:55 -0400 Claude Jones cjoneslists@tehogeeservices.com wrote:
I'd be willing to bet you don't have your machine's video resolution properly configured. Fonts are not blurry in Fedora, at least not on any of many, many machines that I've built.
That depends on the monitor. With my resolution correctly set to 1920x1080 on my 42" HD monitor, the DPI computed (correctly) by the X server is 52 DPI. When it tries to render fonts at 52 DPI, they look awful because it only has a few pixels to try and render a 10 point font (for example). Overriding the DPI and forcing it to 96 makes everything much more visible.
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 21:59:10 +0100 "David Hl____ik" david@hlacik.eu wrote:
How you are satisfied with current font look in Fedora ? It is a blocker for daily work for you?
They look absolutely terrible "out of the box", but if I run the gnome appearance preference app and set DPI to 96 and fonts to use "best contrast", everything gets wonderful.
David Hláèik wrote:
Hello guys,
once again a question from me ...
How you are satisfied with current font look in Fedora ? It is a blocker for daily work for you?
Well for me ... yes, fonts are blurry and it makes my eyes hurt. So even if i love fedora, i can not use it for daily work ...
Thanks,
D.
Many factors contribute to font rendering. Some of those can easily be tweaked from GNOME preferences.
For instance, many LCD panels have issues with the way some video cards render fonts, and or the way that font DPI is calculated. There are settings in the preferences specifically for these issues.
For instance, the correct DPI of my 1920x1200 17" laptop display is over 300 DPI. However, with that setting, I am very limited in screen real estate. Dropping DPI down to 96, which was the old standard for 21" analogue displays, gives me what I am used to.
Many older analogue/Tube based displays have issues based on resolution, refresh rates, RF interference, etc.
For instance, the Dell 19" multi-scan monitor that I use for some equipment testing, has a max resolution of 1600x1200 at 60HZ. At 60 HZ, the monitor will pick up the RF at 60 HZ from all the florescent lighting here at the office, and flicker at 30 HZ, which for me, is noticeable. However, at that resolution, fonts are fuzzy. At a more leisurely 1280x1024 at 85HZ, everything is crystal clear, and no flicker.
To be fair, you did not specify which of these types of issues might be in play.
But please look at: System/Preferences/Look and Feel/Appearance and select the Fonts tab there.
Good Luck!
But please look at: System/Preferences/Look and Feel/Appearance and select the Fonts tab there.
Well thanks for help, but i need to mention the following :
I have been studying a lot recently about font rendering under Linux, alsou about patented subpixel smoothing in freetype,cairo implemented in Ubuntu .
There is a post on Fedora Forum , where you can download patched RPMs with ubuntu subpixel rendering. Those i am using, becouse with standard libraries fonts looks to ugly for me (as i was using a Windows Vista before which has the most excelent sub-pixel rendering alogrithm).
1) So I am using those patched RPMs 2) I have created my own .fonts.conf , where i am using rgb-subpixel smoothing, antialising , and medium hinting for fonts <= then 8px , slight hinting for fonts > then 8px and also only medium hinting for all bold fonts.
Using this I have achieved i believe pretty nice fonts - but - they have something which makes my eyes hurt - probably sub-pixel smoothing algorithm is wrong or somtehing. Simple i am not able to watch it .
What i need to mention also is :
1) That I am using 96 pixel DPI 2) I have ATI graphic (ATI HD 2400 mobile) , using xorg-ati driver 3) My notebook screen has 109DPI , 1400x900px , my second monitor (19" neovo) has 1280x1024 px - so i am using dual head.
And as it is 100times better to see than write, here is actual screenshot of my desktop : http://www.hlacik.eu/screen.png
Please take a look at it and tell me - why my eyes are hurting looking at that?
Thanks in advance!
David
There is a post on Fedora Forum , where you can download patched RPMs with ubuntu subpixel rendering. Those i am using, becouse with standard libraries fonts looks to ugly for me (as i was using a Windows Vista before which has the most excelent sub-pixel rendering alogrithm).
Just to follow up , here is link to that post http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=186789
D.
On Mon October 27 2008 6:07:42 pm David Hláčik wrote:
And as it is 100times better to see than write, here is actual screenshot of my desktop : http://www.hlacik.eu/screen.png
Please take a look at it and tell me - why my eyes are hurting looking at that?
Thanks in advance!
Your evidence speaks to your point - I would be complaining as well. I don't have an idea for you, though I would probably begin by eliminating all customizations, getting rid of twin-view, and just going back to basic-install mode. I've brought Fedora up on better than 30 machines, and other Linux distros on many more, and the only times I've seen what you show is when I had issues that couldn't rightfully be blamed on the distro - mostly screen resolution. Others are saying they too have had issues so, I guess my own sample is not big enough. Good luck.
Your evidence speaks to your point - I would be complaining as well. I don't have an idea for you, though I would probably begin by eliminating all customizations, getting rid of twin-view, and just going back to basic-install mode. I've brought Fedora up on better than 30 machines, and other Linux distros on many more, and the only times I've seen what you show is when I had issues that couldn't rightfully be blamed on the distro - mostly screen resolution. Others are saying they too have had issues so, I guess my own sample is not big enough. Good luck.
And what about Ubuntu's subpixel rendering patches to Fedora, i am using?
I have tried to set DPI to 109pix (which has my notebook's LCD display) , set to subpixel smoothing, installed freetype-freeworld, but fonts are still ugly. Is it that my notebook's LCD is not good?
Thanks,
D.
On Wed October 29 2008 9:34:33 am David Hláčik wrote:
I have tried to set DPI to 109pix (which has my notebook's LCD display) , set to subpixel smoothing, installed freetype-freeworld, but fonts are still ugly. Is it that my notebook's LCD is not good?
I have no idea. Do you have access to a fast internet connection? Another thing you could try if bandwidth is no issue, is to download a couple of other distros and see if they display any better - I would suggest PCLinuxOS because of its configuration tools and one of the Ubuntu flavors... Are you certain that the native resolution of your laptop's LCD is 1400X900? Usually, it would be 1440X900 or 1400X1050 What model laptop is it?
I have no idea. Do you have access to a fast internet connection? Another thing you could try if bandwidth is no issue, is to download a couple of other distros and see if they display any better - I would suggest PCLinuxOS because of its configuration tools and one of the Ubuntu flavors... Are you certain that the native resolution of your laptop's LCD is 1400X900? Usually, it would be 1440X900 or 1400X1050 What model laptop is it?
No my laptop has 1440x900 (Asus F3Sr).
And yes, when i download Ubuntu fonts looks OK - becouse they are using different smoothing algoritmh. (patented )
Regards,
D.
On Wed October 29 2008 12:23:02 pm David Hláčik wrote:
No my laptop has 1440x900 (Asus F3Sr).
OK - in an earlier post, you said you were using 1400X900 - that's why I asked; so, I'm assuming you're saying that the earlier post was incorrect, and you are indeed using 1440X900, correct?
And yes, when i download Ubuntu fonts looks OK - becouse they are using different smoothing algoritmh. (patented )
Maybe that's the explanation, but I don't think so - I still think something else is going on with your Fedora setup - I haven't ever had to deal with the issue you're seeing, except when my screen resolution was improperly set by the automatic mechanisms, so, I just can't offer any other suggestions.
Maybe that's the explanation, but I don't think so - I still think something else is going on with your Fedora setup - I haven't ever had to deal with the issue you're seeing, except when my screen resolution was improperly set by the automatic mechanisms, so, I just can't offer any other suggestions.
Well , and are you using KDE or Gnome, they both have different font
rendering ...
Thanks,
D.
On Wed October 29 2008 4:12:46 pm David Hláčik wrote:
Well , and are you using KDE or Gnome, they both have different font
rendering ...
I use KDE. I'm just spewing opinions at this point, but, the many times I have brought up Gnome, I've never seen the kind of bad fonts you posted. What you posted is severely mangled, not just poor. People get into all sorts of extremely fine points about how they want things to look, and sometimes it just gets a bit foolish, in my view. But, what you're getting is not a fine point, it's seriously problematic - again, good luck on figuring it out. I'm surprised there aren't more people chiming in, but, that's also an indication that others aren't experiencing the issue, and that is usually a sign of a problem peculiar to your configuration or to your hardware - you say your hardware worked fine with Ubuntu, so, I don't think it's the hardware...
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:04:48 -0400 Claude Jones cjoneslists@tehogeeservices.com wrote:
good luck on figuring it out. I'm surprised there aren't more people chiming in, but, that's also an indication that others aren't experiencing the issue, and that is usually a sign of a problem peculiar to your configuration
One of the things I often find helpful is to create a brand new user on the system to make sure it is starting with all the default settings and see how things look there. If they are better, then you know it is something in one of the 47,621 config files in ~/.* - then all you have to do is figure out which one :-).
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:15:58 -0400 Tom Horsley tom.horsley@att.net wrote:
One of the things I often find helpful is to create a brand new user on the system to make sure it is starting with all the default settings and see how things look there.
It's also good to remember to make a copy of the contents of /etc/skel before modifying stuff there, so you can always go back to "out-of-the-box" settings if something explodes.
I just create a tar of the contents of any new installation before making changes.
On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 17:23 +0100, David Hláčik wrote:
And yes, when i download Ubuntu fonts looks OK - becouse they are using different smoothing algoritmh. (patented )
When I last looked at it, it was pretty much the same as Fedora. Just a slightly different font face, and size. And that's about all it often takes to make the difference between nice looking fonts and mediocre displays - a *slight* change in the font.
On Thu October 30 2008 7:57:38 am Tim wrote:
When I last looked at it, it was pretty much the same as Fedora. Just a slightly different font face, and size. And that's about all it often takes to make the difference between nice looking fonts and mediocre displays - a *slight* change in the font.
To Tim and to Rex who made a similar point: If you didn't take a look at his screen grab, you probably should. His problem is not about aesthetics, nice looking vs. mediocre, unicode coverage vs. beauty -- he's got a much bigger issue than that...
To Tim and to Rex who made a similar point: If you didn't take a look at his screen grab, you probably should. His problem is not about aesthetics, nice looking vs. mediocre, unicode coverage vs. beauty -- he's got a much bigger issue than that...
--
Claude Jones
Brunswick, MD, USA
Hello guys ,
first at all , what i had was own .fonts.conf where fonts were by default slight-hinted and bold fonts were medium-hinted.
Now i have done following :
1) Selected medium hinting for all fonts. 2) As addition to patched rpms from Ubuntu rendering i have installed freetype-freeworld from rpmfusion.
And this is the result : http://www.hlacik.eu/screen2.png
What do you think?
Thanks,
D.
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 08:31 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
If you didn't take a look at his screen grab, you probably should.
I did. And when I view that image at 1:1 size, I find that the text rendering is reasonably good, both on LCD and CRT VDUs.
Did you look at it in a web browser that shrinks the picture to fit into the screen space?
I'll point out that much of that grab is dedicated to showing a page in the Firefox web browser, which has its own ideas about font rendering, separate from how the rest of the screen is drawn in Fedora.
And, for what it's worth, the second one seems much worse than the original (blurred, and that blurring is with colour fringing).
http://www.hlacik.eu/screen.png http://www.hlacik.eu/screen2.png
On Thu October 30 2008 11:05:42 am Tim wrote:
I did. And when I view that image at 1:1 size, I find that the text rendering is reasonably good, both on LCD and CRT VDUs.
aarrrrgh....... you're right, but, I did take care to expand the picture when I looked at it yesterday - I'm not sure what I actually did, because now that I look again, I have to agree with you
Did you look at it in a web browser that shrinks the picture to fit into the screen space?
I'll point out that much of that grab is dedicated to showing a page in the Firefox web browser, which has its own ideas about font rendering, separate from how the rest of the screen is drawn in Fedora.
And, for what it's worth, the second one seems much worse than the original (blurred, and that blurring is with colour fringing).
yes, and again, I have to agree with you
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 09:59:10PM +0100, David Hláčik wrote:
Hello guys,
once again a question from me ...
How you are satisfied with current font look in Fedora ? It is a blocker for daily work for you?
Well for me ... yes, fonts are blurry and it makes my eyes hurt. So even if i love fedora, i can not use it for daily work ...
Thanks,
D.
I'm having a lot of trouble suddenly reading xterm fonts. I thought it was diabetes affecting my eyseight, but maybe it is the too-small font.
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?David_Hl=E1=E8ik?= wrote:
Hello guys,
I find fonts to be razor-sharp on on my 1280x1024 lcd monitor. I have set kdm to start the X server with the -dpi 96 flag and have installed the livna freeworld package to allow sub-pixel hinting, with fonts set to 96 dpi in System Settings. I couldn't be more pleased with the font rendering. It is beauty to behold and puts commercial OSes to shame.
Which package , freetype-freeworld?
Thanks. D.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 2:05 AM, Petrus de Calguarium kwhiskerz@gmail.com wrote:
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?David_Hl=E1=E8ik?= wrote:
Hello guys,
I find fonts to be razor-sharp on on my 1280x1024 lcd monitor. I have set kdm to start the X server with the -dpi 96 flag and have installed the livna freeworld package to allow sub-pixel hinting, with fonts set to 96 dpi in System Settings. I couldn't be more pleased with the font rendering. It is beauty to behold and puts commercial OSes to shame.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?David_Hl=E1=E8ik?= wrote:
Which package , freetype-freeworld?
Yes, install freetype-freeworld (it was on livna, but might be on rpmfusion by now, too).
You can see a screenshot at:
http://sites.google.com/site/screenshotsite/
I uploaded a 1280x1024px image of google displaying search results, as that contains a lot of text.
There are a number of ways you can force the X server to start with the native resolution of your monitor (mine is 96 dpi):
1. You can append -dpi 96, or whatever is appropriate, in the kdmrc file on the ServerArgsLocal line (no commas between arguments, just a space).
2. In gdm, there used to be a graphical setup utility and one could configure the X server on the security page, but I don't know if that utility still exists, as gdm has gone through a lot of changes in the last 8 months.
3. To set for this session only: xrandr --size 1280x1024 --dpi 96.
You will realize equally impressive results with image display, when the dpi is set correctly for your monitor.
Check the manual for your monitor to find the correct dpi of your monitor. There might be a formula to calculate it. You might need the dot pitch of the monitor (google for it, if you need it), or the optimal resolution (number of pixels across x number of pixels down).
Mine is 96, as stated in the manual, so I simply choose 96 for my fonts, too. KDE also allows 120 for fonts, but I have not tried it, as it exceeds my monitor's capabilities. It is my impression that most TTF fonts are created for 96 dpi, but I might be mistaken.
-
Claude Jones -
Dave Feustel -
David Hláčik -
Frank Cox -
Peter Langfelder -
Petrus de Calguarium -
Phil Meyer -
Rex Dieter -
Tim -
Tom Horsley