B2: What happened to the default serif font? Please change it back ...Closed

Are you sure it changed? It looks the same to me, though I always use Minion Pro instead.

I must have a bad eye....it looks the same to me.

EDITED TO ADD: I use Tacoma normally

It is rendering very differently ... it is less smooth on screen. It may well be the same font, but the smoothing is less, and so it appears more blocky.

Minion Pro unfortunately doesn't work within LHI - the transliteration lines are full of NPCs.

Richard...

how about a screen shot?

Did your "clear type tuning" somehow turn off?

Cleartype is still on, and anyway I suspect L4 has its own internal algorithms that override Windows settings. I think I can live with it for now, esp as in another post, BobP has said he'll request that "Alber" is made available for resource text.

It may also be an XP-related issue too.

Richard,

I don't know if the font changed or not, but since you mentioned it, it does look more jagged and less smooth than before.  I remember when I first used L4 I was marveling at the new font having a Kindle / e-Ink look.

I'm on Win7 with ClearType turned on by default.

Peter

I have to say that while I don't have a non-beta screenshot I can pull up, the default font does not look at good as it used to.  Here is a screenshot from the ESV:

Fred - that's exactly what mine looks like.

I'm on XP Pro SP3.

Change the font in program settings you couldn't do that in version 3.  I use Gill Sans.

But I don't want a different font.  I want the font (Athelas) to look like it used to.  What happened?  Can someone from Logos comment?

Bob made a big deal about the font in the initial beta test (and it was good looking).  What could have caused it to change?  Why should a selling point be reduced to "oh well, just use some other font"?

I'm not sure the font is a different one, but it sure doesn't look so good in Beta 2 as it does in release. This is on Win7Pro/64.

I'm not sure the font is a different one, but it sure doesn't look so good in Beta 2 as it does in release.

The font is still Athelas; the latest version of the font was included in the 4.0a beta. I've reported your comments to development.

Melissa

I'm not sure the font is a different one, but it sure doesn't look so good in Beta 2 as it does in release.

The font is still Athelas; the latest version of the font was included in the 4.0a beta. I've reported your comments to development.

Melissa

Great - thanks for looking into it.

Here's an approximation of the change from Beta 1\SR7 to Beta 2. The fonts are not Athelas, but it's more about the smoothing. Top one is Garamond Premier Pro, and bottom is Garamond,

Richard,

Thank you for the screenshot. What I am seeing, and also saw on my system with Athelas between SR-7 and B2, is that the new version is more clear. The top line in your image is not as clear as the bottom line. This is what I noticed on my system between the two. What I reported, and is being reviewed (with link to this thread), is that the font seems 'more clear and more rough' at the same time.

Thanks
Melissa

Richard,

Thank you for the screenshot. What I am seeing, and also saw on my system with Athelas between SR-7 and B2, is that the new version is more clear. The top line in your image is not as clear as the bottom line. This is what I noticed on my system between the two. What I reported, and is being reviewed (with link to this thread), is that the font seems 'more clear and more rough' at the same time.

Thanks
Melissa

The new font is definitely better defined, but it is too sharp now and much less easy on the eye.

I much prefer a softer look, as I now have with Garamond Premiere Pro see screenshot, which seems to balance clarity with smoothness. (Unfortunately I have to sacrifice Transliteration, as this is not supported in this font)

Help please!  I spent nearly an hour on the phone with Logos Tech Support this week and over an hour with Microsoft Tech Support.  I am looking forward to a call this afternoon to provide escelated MS support.  The font presentation of my resources in Vista Ultimate with Logos v.3 was clear and crisp once I turned off ClearType and unchecked "Smooth Screen Fonts", but now my resources are blurry with bleedthrough to adjacent pixels.   At first when I installed Windows 7 and Logos4 the fonts presented well, but I seem to recall an update to both products since installation and now yuck!   Doesn't anyone notice the dramatic difference on this blog page between the crisp (highly pixelated) fonts on the text the various users have typed on their postings and the blurry screen shots provided just below that text?  I don't want the "o"s in my resources to look like furry doughnuts.

Which screenshots contain "blurry text"?

Any word on this?

I have to say that while I don't have a non-beta screenshot I can pull up, the default font does not look at good as it used to.  Here is a screenshot from the ESV:

FWIW, here's a non-beta L4 screen shot of that same passage with the default font, just for comparison:

Mine is softer and easier on the eyes, though it's subjective. Some might consider mine fuzzy/blurry and might prefer the sharper outlines of yours.

Some might consider mine fuzzy/blurry and might prefer the sharper outlines of yours.

I believe WPF 4.0 (next year) will offer some better compromise options, but even then it looks like the problem will be one of taste.

The good news is, we have the font with and without hinting, so it may be possible to offer both styles. I'm going to look into it.

(You can read more about this, and WPF 4.0's "yet another" solution, at: http://blogs.msdn.com/text/archive/2009/08/24/wpf-4-0-text-stack-improvements.aspx The ultimate solution is for us all to work at 200 dpi, instead of the typical 92 dpi. If you have a very high-res screen with tiny pixels (many newer laptops) you can use the "Set Program Scaling to 200%" to approximate this, and see how it makes the fonts smoother in all scenarios.)

Some might consider mine fuzzy/blurry and might prefer the sharper outlines of yours.

I believe WPF 4.0 (next year) will offer some better compromise options, but even then it looks like the problem will be one of taste.

The good news is, we have the font with and without hinting, so it may be possible to offer both styles. I'm going to look into it.

(You can read more about this, and WPF 4.0's "yet another" solution, at: http://blogs.msdn.com/text/archive/2009/08/24/wpf-4-0-text-stack-improvements.aspx The ultimate solution is for us all to work at 200 dpi, instead of the typical 92 dpi. If you have a very high-res screen with tiny pixels (many newer laptops) you can use the "Set Program Scaling to 200%" to approximate this, and see how it makes the fonts smoother in all scenarios.)

Bob,

I'm not sure I understand this?  Is there something new in the beta code that is changing the display?  Are you saying that the display options will change?  I'm curious, because one of the "exciting things" about Logos 4 was the display font.  Now it seems like that is lost.

We started with an unhinted version of the font, which rendered through WPF with soft fuzzy edges that some people love and some people hate.

Recently the hinting was completed on the font, and we switched to it. Some love, some hate... So I'm going to look at offering both, and letting users choose, in an upcoming release.

Great - good to know, thanks.

Can't wait until we can choose. I would definitely choose the softer WPF version of the font.