Re: Documentation vs. RV vs. CVS?

[Michael Vance]

On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 03:59:58PM +0100, David Turner wrote:

> Do you mean that you're comparing the following ??:
> 
>   - glyphs returned by Windows, at 12 points and 96 dpi
>   - glyphs returned by FreeType at 12 points and 75 dpi

Yes, this and the 96 dpi on FreeType version.

> the fact that you're getting different glyph heights is absolutely
> normal in this case, given that the only "relevant" value regarding

The problem is that I have to set the FreeType DPI to 75 to get
anything even remotely normal looking. Actually I'm using 72 (default)
right now...

> the final glyph image is the character _pixel_ size, whose value
> is normally :
> 
>        pixel_size =round( point_size * DPI/72 )

Right.

> note that the DPI values returned by systems like Windows and X are
> generally completely bogus :-) If you want to get the same results

I feared as much :)

> than Windows, you should use the same DPI than Windows uses..

Well, when I set FreeType to 96 DPI, I get *huge* output. Setting it
at 72 DPI and fudging the size a bit (non-linearly, no less), seems to
do it.

> note that we do not enable the TrueType interpreter by default anymore,
> so expect _slight_ differences in glyph output..

Right. Any way to turn this on trivially for testing?

> Let us know if changing your DPI doesn't solve your problem..
> Code would be welcome in this case..

I'll cobble something together that has meaningful output.

m.

-- 
Programmer             "Ha ha." "Ha ha." "What are you laughing at?"
Loki Software                      "Just the horror of being alive."
http://lokigames.com/~briareos/                   - Tony Millionaire