W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2002

Re: Identical rendering? [was Re: SVG 1.2 General feedback]

From: Thomas E Deweese <thomas.deweese@kodak.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 07:57:00 -0500
Message-ID: <15836.55324.875145.319242@frog.rl.kodak.com>
To: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org

>>>>> "TR" == Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com> writes:

TR> Thomas E Deweese wrote:

>> Given your interest in high quality rendering [...]  [...] the
>> anti-aliasing was not very high quality.
TR> [...]
>> Well, SVG can be used in a large number of places and this is
>> certainly one of them.  You should take a look at Batik it is
>> currently the most conformant SVG renderer available (unfortunately
>> for you it does not do font hinting at all).  But it is certainly
>> capable of taking the place of a tool like GhostScript (who's font
>> rendering is generally much worse than Batik's - IMHO).

TR> Two issues I found with Squiggles rendering quality:
TR> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14673

    This is because we do no font hinting, so when we turn off
anti-aliasing in response to optimize-speed or geometricPrecision, the
text looks bad.  For text to be readable at 'small' font sizes (<18pt)
you either need bitmap fonts, font-hinting, or anti-aliasing (and
anti-aliasing is really only good down to ~12pt).

TR> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12013

    The rendering of the feather is different and I agree that the
Adobe rendering is more pleasing here, however I suspect that the real
problem is with the SVG, the Apache feather uses line-to's rather than
curve-to's for most of the feather segments - so I don't think it is
batik that is introducing the faciting, the Java2D anti-aliasing
functions may show the faceting more but I think the source had it in
it to start with (there is also little we can do about this sort of
problem as we simply pass the vector data on to the Java rendering
engine that does most of the work).

    You also seem to have caught it at a really bad moment :) If I
zoomed in or out a little bit most of the uglyness goes away.  Once
again I didn't mean to claim that Batik was perfect - just good enough
to do real work.
Received on Thursday, 21 November 2002 07:57:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:46:54 UTC