4 ms·
5x10 without subpixel support is super limiting, and the result reflects that. I assume you'd get used to it, but I really have to work hard to read this font.
by nightcracker 10y ago
5x10 without subpixel support is super limiting, and the result reflects that. I assume you'd get used to it, but I really have to work hard to read this font.
- Semiapies 10y agoYeah, that's save up for eyeglasses or your next prescription territory. I'll cheerfully continue to use 16pt Inconsolata.
- StavrosK 10y agoWhy would exercising your eyes make them need glasses?
- carterehsmith 10y agoExercise involves muscles contracting and relaxing; this looks like just the contracting part, as you squint at too-small things on the screen.
- Semiapies 10y agoPlease, educate yourself about eyestrain before hurting your vision further.
- fazzone 10y agoI agree that 5x10 is small and hard to read, but what use would a bitmapped font have for subpixel rendering?
- josephg 10y agoSubpixel rendering would give the font 3x the horizontal resolution. Its just as useful for bitmap fonts as it is for vector fonts. Especially at that resolution, anything that makes the font more legible would be a boon.
- goatface 10y agoSome years back I built a family of fonts around the idea of anti-aliased raster fonts realized as regular truetype outlines - http://pippin.gimp.org/0xA000/ http://pippin.gimp.org/0xA000/ - in which some variants of the family is designed to be crisp on many integer multiples of the base design size.
- benwr 10y agoYup! It's definitely a niche typeface; I hope at least some people find it useful, but I suspect that most won't.