Hot answers tagged anti-aliasing
11
There are two reasons ClearType text is so crisp.
it uses subpixel rendering. I don't think Photoshop supports that.
it uses aggressive hinting to fit lines into the pixel grid
You can type your text in Notepad, screenshot it with some nice convenient tool, and paste it into Photoshop with blending mode Multiply (because it's black text on a white ...
8
Photoshop is not a web designing program. To get text that looks the same in a browser as in a graphic (jpg, gif etc) you have to use the same font in both programs. Some fonts are not used by all browsers.
Depending on the size of your text, a good mid-sized font could be Tahoma, Helvetica, Trebuchet or Georgia. Check out this website for some good ...
7
This is called clearType in windows (or sub-pixel rendering like Marcelo said)
The idea is that instead of using 1 value for 1 pixel:(127,127,127) < Gray we can make the left side of this pixel less intense and the right side more (55,127,185) - Blueish tint
and then the same for the right sided pixels
(185,127,55) - Orange ting
below it shows (no ...
7
Ignore the anti-aliasing. It's entirely irrelevant in this situation. When you're ready, save the PSD, then Save As a PDF. Uncheck the option to keep the file editable in Photoshop, or just use PDF/X-1a as your PDF type. Your text exports as vector information, not rasterized, so the various Photoshop settings don't apply.
Here are two bits of text inside ...
5
I found that just by changing two pixels in the middle of the second image to white, I could make it a lot more clear:
Here they are at normal size:
It's definitely a little better. So, you might do well just by scaling down Helvetica and then zooming in all the way to see what's making it fuzzy, and then fixing it from there. I didn't spend a lot of ...
4
If you look at how it renders at dafont.com you'll see the same problem. It's not limited to Photoshop. It looks even worse in the OS font preview because, like many cheap fonts, it doesn't seem to have any hinting information at all.
You'll get a somewhat less obnoxious rendering if you use "Smooth" rather than "Crisp" for the anti-aliasing, but any ...
3
Unfortunately Photoshop doesn't support any kind of a subpixel rendering. Nor does any other Adobe software—with the exception of Dreamweaver. (Well it is not exactly Dreamweaver's technology, as it just renders the HTML and then passes the text for the operating system to be rendered.)
The suggested workflow may be that you create and slice your design in ...
3
You should rasterize it in the right pixel dimensions directly from Illustrator whenever possible, but when you're resizing things in Photosohop there is a choice of resampling modes:
Nearest Neighbor - This is the simplest form of resampling, if you can even call it that, where the original pixels are just expanded to the next full pixel to fill the new ...
3
This connects to my question from a few weeks back. I feel there is still not a great answer for "How do I determine when a webfont can cut it vs when to use graphic type?" I outlined how I make that determination, though it's still fuzzy.
The bottom line is, you need to test webfonts in multiple browsers on multiple systems as early in the design process ...
3
Never rely on any print provider to do anything other than spit out your file as it currently exists. I would never trust that something will be output in a specific manner to ensure it is as I expect. If you have to provide instructions or notes on how to output, then it's a recipe for error. If you place a 25ppi image in Indesign it never gets "upsampled" ...
3
Screenshots on Retina Macs are exactly what you may expect: They're double the resolution and pixel density of non-Retina Macs. For a Retina MacBook Pro, full screen grabs are 2880×1800, with the pixel dimensions of elements double the size.
When overlaid with a screenshot of a non-Retina Mac, so that they're both the same physical size, the elements on the ...
3
Photoshop doesn't AA text quite as well as most OS' native text rendering since it uses Photoshop's own AA algorithm, which doesn't make use of subpixel rendering (therefore it probably doesn't make use of ClearType hinting that's embedded in many fonts).
But even if it did, every implementation of AA has its limitations and detractors. Some people prefer ...
3
Antialiasing is a blurring effect, and for small type on business cards, you should avoid it at all costs. Typefaces should be output as vector, especially at small sizes. You comment that you have no proficiency with InDesign. If you have the program, use it.
Now is the ime to learn it, and a business card is the perfect small project. You can do the ...
3
I'm going to try and answer this question based on the given information regardless of format but under the assumption that these are large-format banners going by the hard dimensions given...
If you are combining large elements like this, I would highly recommend that you move your layout work out of Illustrator and into InDesign or Quark, then output to ...
3
My guess was right after all:
If the letters are intended to be displayed in a computer monitor, and the smallest portion of a screen that can be black is an entire pixel composed of three little lights, that would cause the smallest dot in any letter to be fairly large, but if the anti-aliasing composed by surrounding or inner dots can be represented for ...
2
A possible work-around might be to use the "sharp" anti-aliasing method and set a 0-depth inner glow on the text layer:
For this sample I used white color, 85% opacity, "screen" blend mode, 0 choke, 0 size. Not as good as Ms clear-type, but it looks less boldy...
(first line = no anti-aliasing, last line = sharp anti-aliasing without the inner glow)
2
If it's existing photography, then there's nothing to anti-alias. It sounds like perhaps you are scaling your raster images up and simply noticing the pixels more at the larger sizes.
Increasing the resolution of a raster image means the software has to make up the missing pixels. That usually results in a less-than ideal result, but sometimes it's ...
2
Anti-aliasing is a technique to reduce the pixelisation of text on relatively low-resolution screens, and has no use in print.
If you had to use Photoshop and therefore raster text, you'd be best using no anti-aliasing and upping the resolution to a much greater value - maybe 1200ppi or 2400ppi - at which point AA wouldn't be noticeable, even if it were ...
2
Once you have created each shape (I assume that's what you're doing -- if not, that's how you should do this so you can see what you're doing) and scaled to taste, select its path using the Path Selection Tool (black arrow version).
Copy.
Create a new, empty layer and Paste. You now have a duplicate of the path on a new raster layer and can hide the vector ...
2
There's several issues here.
SkarpaLT appears to be designed as a display face. Most thin letterforms are designed for that...posters, headlines, etc.--basically where you'd use them large. They aren't designed to be used as small text faces.
Most screens are still rather low-resolution. The smaller the type, the harder it is to render it cleanly on a ...
1
You're simply resizing a raster image without any interpolation. Another way to put it is that you are 'stretching the pixels'.
Not sure what the better term is, but 'vector' doesn't make much sense in this context.
As for your workflow, it makes sense. In theory, you should be able to stretch the image to any size you want in your page layout software ...
1
If you need to retain the shapes and don't have to be pixel-perfect about the anti-aliasing, you can use selections as a quick & easy guide. Selections always snap to-pixel so they are better "pixel guides" than regular Guides.
For example:
Zoom to 800% (or some other high zoom)
Draw some guides and make a selection.
Using the Rectangle shape tool, ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
