Why are you all obsessed with your font rendering? As long as

>Wants to be able to read the fonts

You Linux ricing fags disgust me, reading is for faggots.

because this shit is magic doublenigger.

https://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/TheChannel9Team/Bill-Hill-A-Hike-Around-Microsofts-Forests-Happy-Birthday-Video-5

Because if my job involves looking at text all day, I might as well have no issues with it.

It reduces eye strain.

>>57494563
nice font rendering.

post dick :3

i will never understand how people argue over which form of font blurring looks the most appropriately blurry

let them be sharp, crisp, and clear

>>57494738
Exactly

>>57494563
That doujin looks very, very interesting

They need a reason to justify their autism.

>>57494381
Because people here use pleb screen resolutions and have to make up for it by scaling things in autistic detail. Before /g/ I never heard ClearType being bad.

>>57494738
>let them be sharp, crisp, and clear

This isn't possible when the letter spacing doesn't match the screen pixels.

>>57495359
ClearType is ESPECIALLY good for low dpi screens.

But you have to configure it properly.
Which is something the average /g/ poster can't do.

File: macType1.png (36KB, 700x456px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 700x456px

Any of you guys using mactype on Windows 10?

I selected tray loading, but I've noticed some applications have a little delay before mactype kicks in. What's the best loading mode?

>>57494381
Font is 90% of what you're looking at on display. It has to look nice if you want to have nice visuals overall.

>>57494381
>As long as you can read it and is a decent font it's fine.
Exactly.
That's why I'm obsessed with it.

>>57495370
>what is hinting.

how do I get good font rendering on linux?

>>57495607
Can you read?
If yes read Registry
>for the most seamless experiences

>>57496342
try infinality

File: 1464248246623.jpg (20KB, 258x245px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 258x245px

>>57494381
>Why are you all obsessed with your font rendering?
>
>As long as you can read it and is a decent font it's fine.

Linux cucks actually believe this

>>57495390
How do you configure it properly?

You are not talking about just going through windows native config and just "pick whatevurr looks gudd" right?

>>57496614
Its Linux users that are obsessed with font rendering.
Its windows' fonts that are fucking horrible.

File: tinyfont.png (113B, 37x6px) Image search: [Google]

113B, 37x6px

How would I make a tiny font like this? I tried downloading some free font editors but none of them work and I can't get them to work after moving them to the fonts folder either.

File: retina.jpg (852KB, 1280x1706px) Image search: [Google]

852KB, 1280x1706px

I don't have to be. I have a high PPI monitor.

People like things that look nice

Anyone else really loving the windows clear type sub pixel anti alias look?

File: KenPerlinFont.png (55KB, 307x225px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 307x225px

>>57496879
That's not tiny, m8

Go subpixel or go home imo

it is ok if it looks mediocre, but it is easy to make it look nice so i did it and now it looks nice

hope this helps you understand OP

>>57496633
>Wants it to look good
>Doesn't want to decide based on what looks good

>>57496013
hinting is making shit blurry

>>57498332
>calibri

File: sans.png (137KB, 947x608px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 947x608px

>>57498364
Better?

>>57494381
>-t. Fedora-User

>>57498332
I don't like how mactype rendering's look in HiDPI, so I don't use mactype now.

>>57496614
I don't think you quite get it.

>>57498514
i think there is basically no point to it in HiDPI, so that's the correct choice.

File: mactype.gif (45KB, 509x513px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 509x513px

Why is it "better"?
Most of the time it looks blurry.

>>57498814
That's the point. To smooth out the edges of fonts and improve kerning.

>>57494381
It's one of those things that once you notice you can't un-notice.

I'm not obsessed with fonts but I certainly notice the ugly ones and change them.

File: rate.png (7KB, 427x61px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 427x61px

r8

>>57496342
Install Ubuntu. Not even memeing.

>>57499426
Blurry/10

>>57499426
ClearType/10

File: Screen Shot 2016-11-13 at 12.53.39 PM.png (59KB, 716x502px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 716x502px

>>57499426
thought i didn't have my glasses on/10

every device will be cucked by os x + rmbp

>>57494381
>as long as you can read it, it's fine
>windows user detected

File: Screenshot from 2016-11-13 18-54-26.png (248KB, 1099x661px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 1099x661px

>>57499531
>Install Ubuntu. Not even memeing.
I am using ubuntu. I am noticing that the font rendering looks alright in some programs and terrible in others. Lollypops font rendering for example looks awful.

>>57498330
Hinting is making things look distorted. But it doesn't matter, because the "correct" undistorted appearance is purely the opinion of designers, and they're all Macbook using Hillary voters so you can safely ignore them.

>>57498321

The anon i responded to implied that there was a way of "properly" configuring it.

Stop projecting your own brainlet ways, retard.

I'm currently just using Noto Sans + the Manjaro font config somewhere on the manjaro wiki. I think it looks alright, but pls r8.

I haven't really noticed any differences between mine and other font rendering, so I haven't had to go full autist over it.

>>57496342
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/font_configuration

If you really wanna get autistic about it, but in my experience you're better off with infinality, or with the ttf update, you can get away with a good preconfig.

>>57499576
It is annoyingly good to be fair, even my vanilla Ubuntu install is jelly.

>>57499603
Holy shit never noticed that before, maybe I'm just lucky. I only regularly use like four programs anyway.

File: 1477072664436.png (509KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 1920x1200px

>>57499648
fug forgot pic

>>57497888
Higher DPI can make such a difference. I use the same font on my desktop and my phone, and it's like night and day. No amount of font configuring can ever make that kind of difference desu.

>>57499613
Hello, /pol/

>>57499531
>Blurry/10
>>57499560
>ClearType/10
>>57499576
>thought i didn't have my glasses on/10

Ubuntu 16.04, how fix

File: Zrzut ekranu z 2016-11-13 19-05-32.png (65KB, 928x700px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 928x700px

>>57499576
Am i doin' it rite?

File: 1471477332347.jpg (259KB, 1280x1185px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 1280x1185px

>>57499603
Cleartype is pretty much chromatic aberration for text.

>>57499603
thats what happens when you put a grey font over a gray background and try to apply rgba rendering.

>>57499920
Any idea on how to fix it? I tried installing infinality but it didn't fix the fonts like the one in the picture.

How do I improve font rendering in windows 7?

>>57494577
this

terminus everywhere please

>>57499949
did you configured infinality
iirc it needs a local.config in /etc/fonts

File: Zrzut ekranu z 2016-11-13 19-24-18.png (552KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

552KB, 1920x1080px

>>57499671
sure upscaling on higher res is nice for fonts but i would still like nice font rendering on low DPI instead of scaling everything 200% on a high dpi.
My point is if i would have a 4k display i would like a bigger one and with 125-150% scaling with nice font config or something instead of scaling to 200%

>>57499949
its not really fixable desu. the pinkish color comes out because its a not-to-dark-gray to not-so-bright-gray scale so the renderer is out of color depth to make it smooth imo. you could try switching to another theme, numix or something.

>>57499949
>>57500044
eventually using gray subpixel rendering will not make it look so pinkish. Try what >>57499984
suggested too.

File: v1.bTsxMjE5Njg0NDtqOzE3MTUxOzEyMDA7MjAyNTszMDAw.jpg (18KB, 206x305px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 206x305px

People too poor to have high PPI argue about font smoothing

File: Screenshot from 2016-11-13 19-41-24.png (83KB, 769x442px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 769x442px

>>57500044
>>57500092
>>57499984
I hadn't changed my style in /etc/profile.d/infinality-settings.sh.
Now it works and it looks a bit better but still not the best. This is the win7 style.

>>57494381
>As long as you can read it and is a decent font it's fine.

This is surprisingly difficult to pull off sometimes.

>>57499741
bump for sanity

>>57499759
Yes how the fuck do your fonts look so nice?

Is it bad that awesome font rendering is quite high up on my list of life goals right now? I'm not sure. I mean I use my computer so much (for work too) that it kinda balances out the amount of pathetic. Sort of. Maybe.

File: Zrzut ekranu z 2016-11-13 21-28-26.png (345KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 1920x1080px

>>57501438
simple faggot, you turn on chrome on Ubuntu, scale this shit up 300% and boom, macfags fucking mad

>>57501517
also gimp-upscale linear the x close button to 43x43px on the right side , and paste it so its fucking sharp as fuck like >>57499759

>>57501438
but seriously though its just plain ubuntu with new libfreetype6 from the infinality ppa (without the infinality fontconfig), and upscaling if you fancy it.

File: firefox_2016-11-13_16-03-41.png (474KB, 1742x944px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 1742x944px

H-how is it
W10 + Mactype

>>57501988
me in Formerly looks like shit. also various spacings are shitty. Ubuntu (>>57500009
) beats that easy. Not to mention general blurriness

>>57501647
Awesome, thanks.

File: terminus.png (101KB, 1609x1773px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1609x1773px

>>57494738
>>57495370
It's called pixel fonts

>>57496879
Maybe start with something like FontStruct. Its pretty useful for quickly knocking out a pixel typeface.

>>57502079
while i like terminus for the terminal, using a monospace font for UI looks bad. I would prefer a serif font to monospace.

>>57502158
>using a monospace font for UI looks bad.
that's just like, your opinion, man

>>57502168
well maybe bad was a wrong word, but GUI needs to fit most shit into a smallest place and sans fonts are just more fit to it. Btw does anyone know whats that one X.org serif font called? I think its monospaced too, appeared once for me when i started purging all packages from my system for teh lulz on debian/gnome, looked kindof cool.

>>57502228
but pixel fonts are the densest you can make readable text

File: Zrzut ekranu z 2016-11-13 22-34-43.png (5KB, 304x51px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 304x51px

>>57502345
they take much more place on GUIs than serif/sans fonts, pic related.
Granted they are much more readable when really really small, and my pic is not the best representation of what a well configured monospace font would look like (because unity) but it usually looks more/less like this when you read it. Sans/serif ttf can be hinted and cramped and stay readable.

>>57502372
It is, and yours is fucking garbage, you brain damaged cross dressing mountain of faeces

>>57502533
>cant even spell 'feces' and expects anyone to take her seriously
lol

File: 1477557498878.jpg (34KB, 550x633px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 550x633px

>>57502548

>>57502475
yes but you could make that pixel font smaller and it would still be readable

>>57502558
haha owned

>>57502612
true ,but sometimes you need a font that is X pixel high and takes little horizontal space. I get what you are trying to prove, that a good font is readable even when extremely small or from a distance, and you have right to like it that way, it just always looks off and hard on the eyes to me.

>>57494381
>Why are you all obsessed with your good food?
>As long as you can eat it and it doesn't kill you, it's fine.

>>57502901
nothing wrong about this, contrary to what OP asked. Literally most of people eat shit food and live to old age , unless cancer/heart attack or stabbed/killed by a car.

>>57503041
>>57502901
If it was bad for you they wouldn't be selling it to you!

>>57502901
>food analogy

Anyone using custom MacType profiles?

>"Eh, whatever. It works, I guess."
That kind of mentality is the arch enemy of good design. That type of shit is how you get Pixel.

As resolutions climb and pixels get smaller font rendering will cease to be an issue

what is a font resolution for low res low dpi ubuntu

>>57504990
Meanwhile designers want “it doesn't work but it looks good”

>>57495607
cleartype >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mactype

>>57506158
How is this true at all

>>57498814
Looks like super mario bros 3 world map

>>57506789
Looks like my shitty font rendering

Doesn't font rendering looking good depend entirely on the monitor you see it on?

File: Screenshot_20161114_065727.png (229KB, 1398x555px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 1398x555px

>>57506836
Rate mine.

File: tokyo font rendering.png (136KB, 882x660px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 882x660px

r8 r8 r8

>>57506956
>>57506997
They look the same
Droid-sans?

>>57507022
Mine is DejaVu.
>>57506956

>>57499603
IMO It looks good on my xubuntu.

File: Screenshot_2016-11-14_02-11-57.png (556KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

556KB, 1920x1080px

>>57499603
Forgot the screenshot like the idiot I am

anyone else find that liberation-sans renders better than noto?

>>57494381
/g/ autism cannot be faked.

>>57502228
fixed

>>57507119
>not using screenfetch -t
kys loser