I was previously using ttf fonts in my game and I found it was better to load them in x2 or x4 the size I wanted them drawn at and then using SetScale (BMax) to draw them smaller. This resulted in more "accurate" looking fonts, although with a slight blur sometimes which I partially corrected by forcing each char to be drawn at integer not floating point coords.
Now I've moved over to bitmap fonts and I've found the same thing. Basically Arial Bold at 18 point seems to be a bit "mishapen" although it is "crisp". So if I make a 36 point bitmap font and scale it down by half when drawing the letters are more accurate but then I have more anti-alias than is desired.
Anyone else found the same thing?
What get's me is why they are more accurate when drawn by the video card half size than by a bitmap font program. Perhaps the video card is using better anti-aliasing? I realised that the bitmap font program has FULL access to the ttf font data (so should produce super accurate bitmap fonts) and the video card only has access to a x2 bitmap font, so it should actually be worse. Ho hum...
Now I've moved over to bitmap fonts and I've found the same thing. Basically Arial Bold at 18 point seems to be a bit "mishapen" although it is "crisp". So if I make a 36 point bitmap font and scale it down by half when drawing the letters are more accurate but then I have more anti-alias than is desired.
Anyone else found the same thing?
What get's me is why they are more accurate when drawn by the video card half size than by a bitmap font program. Perhaps the video card is using better anti-aliasing? I realised that the bitmap font program has FULL access to the ttf font data (so should produce super accurate bitmap fonts) and the video card only has access to a x2 bitmap font, so it should actually be worse. Ho hum...