Font looks much larger

Hello there,
My font looks much larger from yesterday. The resolution is the same:
1280x1024. And I am using Thoma 8. anyboday seem similiar things?

Check this out, http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fon … is-shapen.

Similar Messages

Font looks much differnt on PC

I recently made a website on iWeb and used the courier font size 72. Everywhere this font was used in this size looks completely distorted and pixelated on any PC that opens my site. Does anyone know why? The site can be found at http://web.mac.com/austinlemoine/SnowboardingisFun./Home.html

Courier is supposed to be a cross platform font so I'm surprised it doesn't translate correctly. You could put a very small drop shadow, say 1% on just that 72 pt text (as long as it's in its own text box), and that will convert it to a png image file that will look the same on all platforms.
OT

GNOME 3 Fonts: Font looks off in Applications (GNOME Shell)

The fonts under Applications in GNOME Shell look like I'm missing a font. What font's are required by GNOME 3. There are also multiple entries of applications.

half-left wrote:
Instructions:
Backup your theme directory first. Extract the zip file and rename "gnome-shell" directory to "theme" and copy to /usr/share/gnome-shell/. This path is usually where GNOME Shell is installed.
Restart GNOME Shell by Alt, F2, then type r and press enter.
You can use the gnome-shell theme extension for easier installation of themes.
If it doesn't work check the permissions on /usr/share/gnome-shell/theme directory.
I tried Drakfire Caffe Shell Theme and fonts look much better, but I don't like colors.

Font appears too large

Hi, I'm running Photoshop CS3 Mac.
Text size that would be 9 or 10 point in other apps is only 3 or 4pt in PS. My image size is 600px x 600px, 300 dpi. I think that the font is losing clarity because I have it set to such a low number. Why is this happening? Thanks in advance.

Not sure I understand you, but maybe this will help:
Your 600x600 image at 300 ppi works out to 2x2 inches at actual size. Your 12 point text should look like 12 point text when printed at actual size. However when viewing that 300 ppi image in Photoshop at 100% (i.e. one image pixel = one monitor pixel) it may look too large to you, since your monitor's resolution is probably in the range of 72-100 ppi. (Note that your "2x2 inch" image appears much larger than 2 inches wide in this case.) Therefore a 300 ppi image viewed at 100% in Photoshop will be 300-400% larger than "actual" size, so 12 point type may look too large on screen...in the same way, 3 or 4 point text will look like 12 point text at that magnification.
You can choose View > Print Size for a rough preview of "actual" size, but that depends on the Screen Resolution setting in Preferences > Units & Rulers. 72 ppi is the default, but your monitor may be higher or lower than that.

New fonts look fine in Font Book don't work in apps

I need someone's help. I understand that to install new fonts I can either bring them into my font book (and chose whether they apply to a user or to the system) or can drag them directly into library/fonts or user/library/fonts. I am looking for some new foreign language fonts (e.g. hebrew - cursive, for example). I found some possibilities - ttf fonts - downloaded them, put them into my font book, they validated fine and within the font book they look right (i.e. as they are supposed to). I then quit the font book and go into my app, and it's not happening. When I go into MS word (2008), they don't all appear in the various menus (e.g. I made a font collection for one set, and only two appear in that collection), and when I go to use the ones that appear the font does not look much different from the latin alphabet font that was there before. So, I then tried Apple Mail and, while all the fonts appear in the font collection folder, when I choose any of them, same thing, my test letters are still in the same alphabet - size and intensity a little different, that's all.
Someone told me that for MS Office that there is a separate folder somewhere for office fonts - is that true - where is that? Also, why aren't any of my fonts doing what they're supposed to do in a native Mac application, Apple Mail, despite the fact that they look as advertised in my font books?
Frustrated & confused...

my test letters are still in the same alphabet
To generate non-Latin text in a modern OS you can't just change the font, you need to change the keyboard layout. Go to system prefs/international/input menu and check the box for Hebrew or whatever you want, plus the box for "show input menu in finder." Then select Hebrew in the "flag" menu at the top right of the Finder and type.
You need to make sure you use Unicode fonts. Also MS Word does not yet support correct Hebrew, so use another app. For that script, Mellel is the best. See the applications section of this note:
http://homepage.mac.com/thgewecke/TypingHebrew.html

Why are pdfs so much larger with Mac than a pc?

I have a MacBook Pro and I use the "save as" feature to create pdfs. These are much, much larger than when I used a pc. In fact, most times they are 2-3x the KB of the orginal document. How can I fix this?
Debbie

They arent.....you just have your settings set DIFFERENT on you MAC......I work with Acrobat PDF creation everyday...., and make pdf every day on both Mac and Windows..
.......10 scanned books created in Acrobat for creation is the same as Win Acrobat pdf creation.
Check your pdf settings, optimization settings, dpi settings (for scans)
Make sure youre saving them as the same kind of PDF, there are ....>
archival PDF (pdf-a)
pdf-x
pdf-e
and other PDF embedding. Embedded fonts set/unset in default.

Why is menu size so much larger than the files?

I am somewhat perplexed - I'm making a single-layer dvd and have a simple single screen theme (no animation) - it has one drop zone. The movie has 28 chapters so there are five of them, but so far I've added only one montage of photos to each menu page - it's a "mobile" quality in media browser and ave only 10 - 20 MB, then one song. On average these movie clips are 1:00 to 2:00 min long and the music is cut to that length. So, all told, it's probably less than 110 MB in files - but when I look at the project properties, the menus are 3301 MB!!!
The movie itself is only 1.1 GB so what is going on?
It's preventing me from doing the project and I've got no idea why it's making the menu size so much larger than the file sizes?
Can you please help me figure out what to do?
Alexa

The 2 min clips were natively 2 min - I had each one separate and actually converted to media browser in "mobile" size (b/c the drop zone was 4 x 6 in size in the theme). They were tiny - in most cases I was shortening the audio (e.g. the song was 4 minutes and I was setting the loop to only 1:30 b/c that's how long the video clip was on the menu).
BUT, to resolve the question (I always like to post the answer) - I ended up duplicating the project to try to reimport the video. It was a fresh iDVD project and I happened to click on the project tree of screens - and, lo and behold, the ENTIRE menu was duplicated for some reason (and the movie, actually). I went back to the original and it was the same! I have no idea how that would happen do you? It only had one main menu screen - and then an entire duplicate menu - which I wouldn't even know how to access if I didn't see it in the project menu tree?
The only think of is that at one point I added a title menu link to the scene selection - it gave me a warning that my menu was more than 12 minutes, did I want to fix or ignore and fix later - which confused me b/c it was under 12 min, then but I clicked ignore. Does that create an alternate title menu and send people back to something else?
Anyway, I deleted the entire extra scene selection menus (5 of them) and it was back to under 4 GB.
So, I was able to burn, but still wondering about creating the "title menu" link on scene selections? It drives me crazy that it doesn't automatically do that so I like to add "main menu" links.
Thanks for your help!
Alexa

Exporting PDF format for web viewing, fonts look bad

Hey everybody I'm relatively new to indesign so sorry if this is a simple one. I'm doing a newsletter in indesign, which will be used stricktly for web viewing. Whenever I export the file as a pdf the body text fonts look a bit off, as though they are slightly pixelated around the edges. This is not as noticable in the artcile titles with larger font, but any smaller font (i'm using size 14, and futura book) and it gets this pixelation, it is even more noticeable in the thinner type sets of the font. Another odd thing is the first page of the newsletter the fonts are more messed up looking than the following pages where the same font types and sizes are used, the only major difference is the first page has a photo on it, but the fonts that look weird are below the photo not overlaying it or anything like that. I turned off all the compression on the pdf export, also tried it will varying amounts of compression but still have the same issue. And I am viewing this in Mac's Preview program, not acrobat.

Ok, just checked through all the flattening preview highlights and everything looked fine in that. Since my exported document looked perfectly fine in acrobat, but sort of pixelated in mac's preview, is there any way around that?
If you are serving the PDF via a web address it will very likely be viewed in a browser (not downloaded and opened in an app like Preview or Reader). All of the browser displays have slightly different anti-aliasing, which you can see if you zoom in on a screen capture of the text. Here's a line of text from your PDF at 100%, magnified to 400% in Photoshop. From top to bottom Safari, Chrome, Firefox:
There's nothing you can do about the anti-aliasing quality of the different browsers and apps. The PDF you posted has live transparency, so it isn't a flattening issue.

Reduce file size makes documents much larger.

In my new Acrobat 10.1.6, "reduce file size" and "optimize" keep making the document much, much larger. Reduce file size even took a document previously at 3.3 mb and turned it into 24 mb. So I took the same document and went back to my previous Acrobat 5, and it actually reduced the file size as expected. What's going on?

geekinthegarden wrote:
Generally reduce file size works great...
Microsoft Publisher...Ghostscript...PScript5.dll
I seem to be able to open and reduce file size using Acrobat so I'm not quite sure why Preview is choking on them.
Hi geekinthegarden- This does not surprise me. There are many variations and reiterations in specifications of the PDF format.
Going from Ghostscript language interpreter, to Apple in rendering could introduce complications which we will not be able to sort out in this forum encapsulating a complete description of a fixed-layout 2D documents that includes the text, fonts, images, and 2D vector graphics which compose the documents.
Suffice to say it is not a perfect science.
Print PDF has a compress PDF file option as well as ColorSynch in your /Utilities folder +reduce file size+ option for PDF's. This may or may not be of use.
You found your workaround using Acrobat, this is part of the value of having more than one PDF viewer, good computing!

Fonts look bad in OSX jagged text

Hello
I thought apple gave us font smoothing in OSX! My fonts look terrible in QuarkXpress6.0. Is this what I have to look forward to? I miss my ATM.
I did the "font smoothing thing" in appearence-no change.
Also will all my older fonts from when I used OS 7 +8, will these still work in OSX? and by Quark XPress?
Please enlighten me!
all fonts look bad; Goudy old style, bellvue etc. (postscript type 1)
imac G5 Mac OS X (10.4.4) 21" screen

if I zoom out in Quark to view document at say 125% the 45 pt type really looks bad
Hmm. I'm unable to duplicate your problem. I've pasted some random text into Quark, sized it to 45 pt and set the zoom to 125%. No matter if I go up or down, the fonts look very smooth with both Goudy Old Style and News Gothic (I have the Adobe version, not MT, which is from MonoType). Well, if I look real close, I can see a little bit of jaggies around curves. But nothing very noticable.
Is your 21" monitor a CRT or LCD? LCD always produce the best image when used at their native resolution. A CRT's best display varies depending on whether it has a shadow mask or aperture grill tube. If your monitor has an independent control for sharpening, it may be too high.
I have some fonts installed that I don't know where they came from ex: News Gothic MT (Microsoft I think) Will these view and print okay in any program?
As long as it's a standard Mac suitcase style TrueType font, or a complete and proper Type 1 PostScript font, it should just as well as any other.
I keep all my fonts in classic folder and manage w/font book (thats another story) It seems that my classic apps, Illustrator, see most of the fonts all the time eventhough I turned many off in fontbook. Also illustrator doesn't see ALL the fonts.
That's a handful. When it comes to Classic, the rules are a little different. Fonts you manually place into the OS 9 Fonts folder, or are put there by the OS when activating them from Font Book with OS 9 as the choice to be activated for, fonts are then available to both Classic and OS X.
If you deactivate them in Font Book, the fonts will become unavailable to OS X apps. However, any Classic apps will continue to see them until you shut down all OS 9 applications and Classic. In other words, once you open fonts for Classic, they can't be closed to Classic without shutting the entire environment down. Confused yet?
As far as Illustrator not seeing all the fonts, that relates to this part of your question:
Please explain the limitations of classic apps and fonts.
Classic can use any fonts that were in existence for the Mac before OS X. All of your older Mac TrueType and Type 1 PostScript fonts will work in OS X and Classic. Fonts that will work as is in OS X that you couldn't use before on a Mac are PC TrueType fonts. If you have copied any of the OS X .dfonts into the OS 9 Fonts folder, those will not work. A .dfont is a variation of a TrueType font, with the data in the data fork rather than the resource fork as they are with the older Mac TrueType fonts. Neither OS 9 or any Classic apps can read these fonts. Those are likely the ones not showing up in Illustrator.
It sounds like you do a lot of work with fonts. While Apple has improved Font Book quite a bit in Tiger, it's still very much a consumer font manager for those who handle fonts only occasionally. You'd be much better off using a font manager such as Suitcase X1 or Font Agent Pro.

Photoshop Elements 8 Mac - All fonts look jagged and pixely

HI,
I have the problem that all fonts look jagged and pixely when using Photoshop Elements 8 on Mac OS X 10.6.3. I am using the right image size 300dpi and so forth. Interestingly enough this only happens in Photoshop. If I repeat the procedure in Pixelmator everything is normal.
I would really appreciate any suggestions.

Are you simplifying the font layer and then making it larger? Can you explain exactly, step by step, what you're doing?

Email account folder in /user/library/mail is much larger than full mailbox archive for the same account

Hi,
I recently changed jobs and want to archive all email (with attachments in place) for the associated work email account. I also plan to remove the old work email account (IMAP) from the list of active mailboxes in Apple Mail. I don't want Spotlight searches for personal or current work email cluttered with results from my old job.
I have created an archive of the old work account by doing Mailbox Archive for all of the IMAP folders for that account. The entire archive is 1.7GB in size.
Before I delete the old account from my Mail preferences, I want to make sure that I have really exported everything. So I've compared the size of the new archive folder with that of the mailbox folder in users/.../Library/Mail for that same account. That latter is 8.7GB in size. Why the enormous difference?
Can the difference be attributed to lack of compression and indices (which would be rebuilt if I import the archive) for spotlight searches? Am I missing something in the archive that I created?
I've created a zip of the system folder. Can I easily restore this at a latter time if I delete the email account from my Mail preferences?
Is there a better way to achieve my objective?
Mitoids

I did find a "Recovered Messages" by looking in the the Mail client under "On My Mac" (I don't normally use that feature). One message with an accicental 99MB attachment that I never sent, was recovered ~60times, consuming 5.7GB.
I deleted all of those, but the size ~/Library/Mail/xxxaccount folder did not change much. It is still much larger than the Archive I created. BTW, this is an IMAP account that was syncing with corporate GMail.

Why do fonts look better on the stage?

I have a paragraph of text on the stage that looks good (Helvetica Neue, Ultralight), but when I play the movie it looks much thinner and really bad. Why does the text on the stage not match the movie?

If it is static text and you are using a dynamic textfield, try changing it to a static textfield. Also, you may want to try different anti-aliasing settings for the textfield (via the properties panel). If you are doing anything to filter the text, such as applying a drop shadow, this can also impact the appearance. If all else fails, try a different font.

My iphone 5's font gets unusably large

Occasionally my iphone 5's screen font gets really large. So large that I can't access the slide to shut it off. It is as though the screen gets magnified. It requires a reboot to get it back to normal. Anyone else having this issue? What is the problem?

Try double-tapping with three fingers.
Look in:
Settings > General > Accessibility

Database much larger than expected when using secondary databases

Hi Guys,
When I load data into my database it is much larger than I expect it to be when I turn on secondary indexes. I am using the Base API.
I am persisting (using TupleBindings) the following data type:
A Key of size ~ *80 Bytes*
A Value consisting of 4 longs ~ 4*8= *32 Bytes*
I am persisting ~ *280k* of such records
I therefore expect ballpark 280k * (80+32) Bytes ~ *31M* of data to be persisted. I actually see ~ *40M* - which is fine.
Now, when I add 4 secondary database indexes - on the 4 long values - I would expect to see approximately an additional 4 * 32 * 280k Bytes -> ~ *35M*
This would bring the total amount of data to (40M + 35M) ~ *75M*
(although I would expect less given that many of the secondary keys are duplicates)
What I am seeing however is *153M*
Given that no other data is persisted that could account for this, is this what you would expect to see?
Is there any way to account for the extra unexpected 75M of data?
Thanks,
Joel
Edited by: JoelH on 10-Feb-2010 10:59
Edited by: JoelH on 10-Feb-2010 10:59

Hi Joel,
Now, when I add 4 secondary database indexes - on the 4 long values - I would expect to see approximately an additional 4 * 32 * 280k Bytes -> ~ 35MA secondary index consists of a regular JE database containing key-value pairs, where the key of the pair is the secondary key and the value of the pair is the primary key. Your primary key is 80 bytes, so this would be 4 * (4 + 80) * 280k Bytes -> ~ 91M.
The remaining space is taken by per-record overhead for every primary and secondary record, plus the index of keys itself. There are (280k * 5) records total. Duplicates do not take less space.
I assume this is an insert-only test, and therefore the log should contain little obsolete data. To be sure, please run the DbSpace utility.
Does this answer your question?
--mark

Font looks much larger

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for