Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.programmer:6252 comp.sys.mac:31839
Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!apple!Apple.COM!lsr
From: lsr@Apple.COM (Larry Rosenstein)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: System 7.0 Q & A
Message-ID: <1828@internal.Apple.COM>
Date: 12 May 89 18:23:19 GMT
Sender: usenet@Apple.COM
Organization: Objects-R-Us,  Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 26
References:<30353@apple.Apple.COM> <4666@okstate.UUCP> <1787@internal.Apple.COM> <23868@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>

In article <23868@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> lange@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (Trent Lange) 
writes:
> Will bitmap fonts be the standard way for drawing "normal-size" fonts
> (eg 9, 10, 12)?  It seems to me that the mathematical calculations

This issue is not so much the time to convert outlines to bitmaps (since 
that is very fast).  It is a question of which mechanism ends up with the 
best results and how much time the font designer wants to spend adding 
font instructions.

One of the people working on the outline fonts here was able to add 
instructions (hints) to get good looking 9 point screen fonts.  But the 
time involved in getting the fonts to look good increases greatly as you 
deal with smaller point sizes.  Font vendors might find it easier to 
distribute 9 point bitmap fonts than spend the time tuning their outline 
fonts.  10 and 12 point fonts are not as difficult to tune, but still may 
look better as bitmaps.




Larry Rosenstein, Apple Computer, Inc.
Object Specialist

Internet: lsr@Apple.com   UUCP: {nsc, sun}!apple!lsr
AppleLink: Rosenstein1