|
|
@@ -79,13 +79,16 @@ this doesn't like a very good way for fonts to work.
|
|
|
Multiple people who have experimented with this independently (me,
|
|
|
Fabian Giesen,and Maxim Shemanarev of Anti-Grain Geometry) have all
|
|
|
concluded that correct gamma-correction does not produce the best
|
|
|
-results for fonts. font rendering just generally looks better without
|
|
|
-gamma correction (or probably with some arbitrary power stuck in
|
|
|
+results for fonts. Font rendering just generally looks better without
|
|
|
+gamma correction (or possibly with some arbitrary power stuck in
|
|
|
there, but it's not really correcting for gamma at that point). Maybe
|
|
|
this is in part a product of how we're used to fonts being on screens
|
|
|
which has changed how we expect them to look (e.g. perhaps hinting
|
|
|
oversharpens them and prevents the real-world thinning you'd see in
|
|
|
a black-on-white text).
|
|
|
|
|
|
+(AGG link on text rendering, including mention of gamma:
|
|
|
+ http://www.antigrain.com/research/font_rasterization/ )
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
Nevertheless, even if you turn on gamma-correction, you will find that
|
|
|
oversampling still helps in many cases for small fonts.
|
nothings