Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Generate alternative README.md for different font sizes #116

Open
char101 opened this issue Dec 20, 2015 · 8 comments
Open

Generate alternative README.md for different font sizes #116

char101 opened this issue Dec 20, 2015 · 8 comments

Comments

@char101
Copy link

char101 commented Dec 20, 2015

Hi,

Since people use different font sizes in their editors, and some fonts look better in certain size, could you generate the previews for different font sizes, for example previews in 9pt would be in README-9pt.md, 10pt in README-10pt, and so on.

Thanks.

@tomByrer
Copy link

There is already a monofont playground
But a version of this with all Codeface's fonts would be great.

@chrissimpkins
Copy link
Owner

Thanks for this suggestion Charles. As Tom mentioned, we developed an ACE editor based web application as part of our Hack typeface project that permits comparison of a large number of these typefaces. We tossed in a number of web fonts for faces that release them and many others show up in the menus when you install them on your system. If you click the Compare Side-by-Side button in the upper right corner, you can view two faces at the size that you define in the dropdown on the upper left corner of the screen.

font-playground

If this meets your needs, we could consider expanding this resource to include all of the typefaces in this repository.

@char101
Copy link
Author

char101 commented Dec 21, 2015

Thanks, the playground is nice. What I'm suggesting is that the screenshots in codeface are supposed to reflect how the fonts will look, but fonts do not necessarily look the same in different sizes.

For example here is M+ font in 9pt and 14pt. The 14pt screenshot is scaled so it looks thinner but in full size it is too bold in my opinion.

m 9

m 14

The screenshots in codeface are also scaled to the container element width (888px) so they do not really reflect the font size in 16pt.

@chrissimpkins
Copy link
Owner

The screenshots in codeface are also scaled to the container element width (888px) so they do not really reflect the font size in 16pt.

This is now fixed

@chrissimpkins
Copy link
Owner

the screenshots in codeface are supposed to reflect how the fonts will look, but fonts do not necessarily look the same in different sizes

This is a great point. I would counter, however, that there are so many variables at play across displays/renderers/platforms/hinting settings that we will never truly capture this for all, or even most, users. The goal here is to provide a flavor of the included faces so that you can select a subset and explore them on your own with your own personal set of all factors that play a role in the rendering of fonts on the screen. I intentionally display them at a large font size (14) for source code editors in order to provide more glyph + spacing detail than you would see at very small font sizes. The Font Playground tool begins to address an issue like this, but even there you will not necessarily see the same font rendering that you would in some applications on the same system (the JetBrains editors that use the Java font renderer are perfect examples).

Any thoughts about a different approach?

@chrissimpkins
Copy link
Owner

Moving to a scripted image generator approach. See #119. This may be very feasible for a range of font sizes once this tool is in place. Let me get the main gallery updated and then we can discuss this in more detail.

@char101
Copy link
Author

char101 commented Dec 24, 2015

👍 I thought the screenshots was already generated automatically since I found this file render.py on the repository. Obviously I was not going to suggest generating screenshot for different font sizes if they have to be taken manually since it is a lot of work.

@chrissimpkins
Copy link
Owner

To date, it has all been manual :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants