Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Workbench fonts "missing pixels"  (Read 1415 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ArcticSonTopic starter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2006
  • Posts: 39
    • Show all replies
Workbench fonts "missing pixels"
« on: January 19, 2009, 05:49:13 PM »
Hi All, could someone please tell me if I am on the
right track here.

The issue is using higher res Picasso IV screens (Picasso96
RTG software) makes characters in the text labels of WorkBench icons and on some menus "break up".  The letters appear like they are missing serveral pixels.

In doing some reading, I am thinking the standard fonts
cannot handle the higher display resolutions.

Is using TT Fonts or Postscript fonts on an OS3.9 Workbench
with "Type 1 Library" and "True Type Font Library" a likely remedy?  Does anyone else run these on OS 3.9 and
find they did not "step on" anything native to the OS?  This "This Old Workbench" article reprint is where I had read about these two add-ons:

This Old Workbench Link

Thanks for any thoughts on these as a solution or on other
alternatives!


 

Offline ArcticSonTopic starter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2006
  • Posts: 39
    • Show all replies
Re: Workbench fonts "missing pixels"
« Reply #1 on: January 20, 2009, 02:47:30 AM »
Thanks meega and llwrath,

I was using a CGTimes font (not sure where its from) in a 20 pitch to make things legible for me, but in fact when I was using Topaz, had typed in my own value.  Doh! :-)

The largest font available in the fonts I have (usually 11 pitch) is probably just too small for my old eyes. Or it could just be my Amiga getting back at me for setting it aside from being my main system back in 2001.  

I have TypeSmith, so perhaps just loading an existing font and bringing it up to 16 pitch would do the trick?  I was looking at some of the 1280x1024 Workbench screenshots here in the Images forum and see they have a nice, crisp Workbench icon font, so will shoot for that.

Thanks again!

  -Steve