Typography pixelated

I'm creating titles in Photoshop for import into FCP. I design the titles, save them, send them as attachments to the video editor who inserts them into the Timeline. I make sure I make the titles in 16:9 format, since we're working in HDTV in FCP. I make sure I'm using TrueType fonts. I provide an alpha channel. But no matter what I do, the fonts look fuzzy when I see them as QTs or as DVDs.
What can I do to keep the type nice a sharp when it imports into FCP?
Czet

You'll need to define your subjective terms and demonstrate that you understand video's pixel limitations before we can really have this discussion.
A Photoshop document with appropriate alpha over black, not white--which is all print guys know anything about, will drop seamlessly onto an FCP timeline and render at the timeline's pixel dimensions, NOT at the psd dimensions. If you give your editor a 3k psd it's going to get scaled down to 1000 pixels and is going to look awful. If you have given your editor a psd at the proper size with the proper alpha then we can start talking to the editor.
Your HDV video is being crunched down to MPEG2 for the DVD and much can get lost. Your reference to "QT" is meaningless without knowing the format and size of the QT.
bogiesan

Similar Messages

I am writing a book to be published. how to i get my pages documents to PDF or JPG or something else that is at least 224 pixels per inch?

i am writing a book to be published. how do i get my "pages document" to a high definition level...at least 224 pixels per inch? i can get to 150 ppi via preview to JPG, but that seems to be the best i can do with my new snow leopard imac.

Hello Barbara,
> i have text written in Pages and these need to be at least 224 ppi.
i also have photo collages that were created in Pages and also need to be at least 224 ppi.
the book has about 60 pages of photo collages and about 30 pages of text.
If you want to print using a digital press or an offset lithographic press at high resolution, then you typography is resolution independent but your photography is not. In other words, you must embed into your Pages document the images in the resolution that is right for rendering in the high resolution raster image processor.
Raster image processors will as a rule of thumb produce good quality detail if you embed photographs with 300 dot per inch resolution. Because raster image processors differ in how they reproduce detail, and because this information is generally not public a rule of thumb principle is applied in preparing the page description for printing.
By default, if you use colour transparency in your work, the system graphics service will detect this and save out PDF 1.4 automatically. However, not all raster image processors have PDF frontends that accept PDF 1.4. For this reason, there is a fallback which you must set up yourself.
If the receiving raster image processor does not have a PDF frontend that accepts PDF 1.4, you have to manually enter the resolution at which the transparency will be rendered. The system graphics service will then render the resolution for you and save out what it technically termed a 'flattended PDF'.
Alternatively, if you don't want to work with the Apple ColorSync Utility yourself, you can send your PDF 1.4 with resolution independent transparency to a prepress operator who will then use specialised software to render the resolution for the specifics of the service he or she is selling you.
If you want to work with the prepress interface in system graphics services, then below is a link to summary on setting up the ColorSync Utility for ISO 15930-3:2002 PDF/X-3. This passes prepress preflight testing in Adobe Acrobat Professional 6.0.1 (the first version that tested for PDF/X-3).
/hh
Reference
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2738092?threadID=2738092&tstart=0

Font smoothing, font sizing, sub-pixel tuning, OS X vs Windows

I have a query regarding font the font smoothing implementation in OS X.
Having just come from the Windows world (using ClearType) naturally comparisons will be made. I am trying to get fonts looking as readable as possible on my Mac. I have 19" LCD connected via DVI so would expect no issues there. It seems difficult to get fonts looking... crisp. I am starting from the basis of using font smoothing across the board as recommended. Turn off smoothing is set to font size 8 or smaller.
I note with respect to tuning of font smoothing (anti-aliasing) that there is not a 'fine tuning' tool like as made available on Windows...
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/tuner/Step1.aspx
for the Mac. At least I can't find anything Googling. And I am not thinking of TinkerTool as that is not a fine tuner. The Windows ClearType tuner can really make a noticeable difference by adjusting the sub-pixel tuning. Is there any equivalent tool/configuration option available for Macs?

You must have extremely good vision to be able to
tell the enhacement made by ClearType on XGA or
better displays. I wish my eyesight is as good as
yours.
Well by your own admission you must be half blind, and I think you must be if you can't see the difference between - and let's be precise about this - no anti-aliasing vs. anti-aliasing +- sub-pixel rendering. Whether on Windows and/or OS X. There is.
Subpixel rendering is a trick used when resolution of
displays are challenged and small font readability is
crucial.
Today, the only place this makes sense is on
cell phones when you are trying to render small type
like a webpage.
I believe the website links I posted show that I have a reasonable grasp of what sub-pixel rendering is, that was not the purpose of my question. Also, actually, you are incorrect when you state that sub-pixel rendering is relevant/necessary only for small fonts. The exact opposite is true - usually sub-pixel rendering (including in OS X) is turned off for small fonts because it tends to make them more unreadable.
On desktop displays today at XGA or greater resolution,
the tradeoff in enhancing a bit in resolution is
outweighed by the added computation cycles needed to
filter the entire display so the eye sees "grey" on
average rather than red or green or blue.
Well you better rush and tell Apple to rip it out of OS X... because they seem to disagree with you as both anti-aliasing and sub-pixel rendering are included, and encouraged to be used, in OS X!
I'm sorry, but your statements are just plainly wrong and unconsidered.
Back to my - still unanswered, factual and valid question. The implementation of anti-aliasing + sub-pixel rendering in OS X does not appear, and I am stating this unbiasedly, to be as good as it could be (as I have seen in Windows). BTW this is not solely my finding as a number of very experienced Mac users have pointed out:
Here...
http://www.michelf.com/weblog/2006/subpixel-antialiasing-achilles-heel/
and here...
http://www.betalogue.com/2006/01/24/pages-20-does-not-fix-font-smoothing-issue/
and here...
http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/02/04/font-smoothing-in-pages/
I gather from the replies I have received thus far, and from research on the Internet, that there is currently no way - going into Unix config files or by some utility - to address this issue. Hopefully it will be improved in a later version of OS X.
BTW - this does not stop me loving my new Mac!

Matching InDesign and Photoshop Pixel Dimensions

I'm attempting to use InDesign to determine pixel sizes of a baseline grid and typography that will eventually be used on a webpage. Since Photoshop doesn't have a baseline grid or a baseline grid snapping feature, I thought I might be able to make something work in InDesign.
Unfortunately I'm running into a problem, where pixel dimensions in InDesign don't seem to match up with pixel sizes in Photoshop. For example, with documents at 100% view in both Photoshop and InDesign, a 100px square appears larger on screen in InDesign than in Photoshop. It's as if InDesign is rendering the view at a different resolution than Photoshop.
Above you can see a square made at 42 pixels in InDesign viewed at 100% zoom (though InDesign insists on displaying the size as points) with the same square screen-captured and opened in Photoshop. The square is actually measured at 54 pixels.
How can I get InDesign to display the same pixel sizes as Photoshop?

True enough on both counts! Relative resolution and scaling is definitely helpful for print design (I learned early on what scale to view in order to preview onscreen at what would be actual physical size--the reverse of double-clicking the zoom tool now, I guess.)
But I see no reason why we can't have it both ways. Isn't that the whole point of "web" or "Digital Publishing" intent in document setup? Why not have Indesign switch to 1-1px scale when you create a document set to web intent? Wouldn't be any different, functionally, than what the script does, it would just revert to physical scale when I open a print document. Seems like it should be obvious that the preview scale when creating a web site should be 1 pixel is 1 pixel--my browser isn't going to display my website at 123.7% scale. Or that if you chose the "iPad" digital pub template, the display scale should be twice that of a (theoretical) Retina display iPad. It's functionally just a different number, right? That is, if I were writing a script, I could theoreticall specify any resolution I wanted to get the desired display scale.
Ok, so now I'm turning this into feature request, I know, and the question has been thoroughly answered. But it needn't be that complicated--all we really need is a place to CHOOSE what mode to opperate in, right? If Adobe really prefers not to open the output-intent-view-scale can o' worms, then why not leave an Acrobat-style resolution preference where I can type in a number? The obvious advantage of that over the script solution is that it's easy to set or reset.
Aside: while we're on the topic of having it both ways in regards to using Indesign for more than print work... Why not include the option to set the document color profile (most likely to sRGB) when I choose "web" intent in a new document dialog? Oh! And give me actual RGB black and white color swatches in "web" documents.
I'm just excited about the idea of Adobe taking a few more steps in the direction they've started with the whole document intent feature set in Indesign. A more inviting web design environment wouldn't in any way keep me from continuing to use Indesign for print work (all day every day). What is there to lose? Not like they're developing Fireworks anymore, and Indesign already makes more sense for web than Illustrator. ... I'm sure it's a HUGE internal debate at Adobe. Probably some Fireworks replacement app in the works that I don't know about.

Does CS5 Improve Typography and Color Swatches?

Hi, we are web developers creating mostly dynamic CMS based websites. We have been using Illustrator for designing our layout comps to send to the client for approval and drive the template design process. We only generate the actual graphics needed for the site from these files, we don't try to convert our comps into actual code (we just match the look with our templates using PHP & CSS).
But Illustrator has always been one of our most frustrating programs to use. It just has a tendency to be buggy (you have to nudge your slices down 1 pixel to export properly), or just plain counter-intuitive. And we have been using it for MANY years (we also do print and environmental graphics).
But when I've experimented with Fireworks to see if it would be a better solution (it SHOULD be), there were always a couple glaring features missing that would make it hard to use. The last one I tried was a demo of CS4.
TYPOGRAPHY
- Does Fireworks finally use the same type engine as Illustrator and Indesign?
- Does it support styles so you can apply certain type styling, say to headlines, and have them be globally editable?
It's such a drag to have to manually update the text formatting in 20 different places when you want to try a larger font size or something for your headings. We then use these styles as a basis for our main CSS styles.
COLOR
- Does Fireworks finally use the color swatches feature of Illustrator and InDesign?
- Can you create global swatches with (heaven forbid) some sort of name that makes sense (like the hex/rgb value) and have all objects with those colors be updatable by editing the swatch?
I can't understand how people could actually use those tiny little swatches with no indication of what actual color each was.
THANKS! If these two areas have been addressed, Fireworks might actually be a viable option for creating comps over Illustrator as it should be.

Fireworks has been using the same Text Engine as Illustrator since CS4.
It doesn't create styles the same way one would with MSWord or probably Indesign. It's a graphics app primarily. That said, you can create graphic styles which - when using the redefine styles tool - you can update any text in the same page that has the same style applied.
Fireworks now supports ASE files. They can be imported as a swatch set and you can also generate ASE files from Fireworks.
FW has had the ability to find and replace color values in text and vectors for many versions, but not from the Swatch panel. You cannot name individual swatches in the Swatches panel, but in the color fill panel you can see the hex value of a selected object and even copy the value to the clipboard.
I recommend you reading the article written by Bruce Bowman:
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/logged_in/bbowman_fwcs5.html
Jim Babbage

Is Cleartype able to support both RGB and BGR sub pixel panel displays at the same time?

Hi,
I am using 2 27' LED displays on my PC. One has RGB sub pixel, the other has BGR sub pixel.
I have problem to tune the font using Cleartype. I have tried to tune all displays a few times and always get the following result.
If I use the RGB one as the primary display, the font on the RGB display looks ok but the font on the BGR display looks weird after tuning using cleartype.
If I use the BGR display as the primary, the font on the BGR display looks ok but the font on the RGB display looks weird after tuning using cleartype.
Basicly, the after tuning with Cleartype, the font on the Primary display looks good but on the other looks weird.
I have also tested with single display setup. i.e. connect only the RGB sub pixel display or the
BGR sub pixel display.
ClearType tuning works well for single display setup no matter which display I have connected.
But once I connect the 2nd display and tune using Cleartype, the font on the Primary display looks good but on the other looks weird. (The same as above)
To be more specific, the RGB display is Philips 278C4 (connect using HDMI), the BGR display is Dell P2714H (connect using DisplayPort. I have also tried DVI. DisplayPort or DVI give same result).
My system is Win 8.1 Pro x64 JA-JP with all latest patches installed, and my graphic card is nVidia GTX 760, with the latest driver installed.
I suspect this is due to one display has RGB sub pixel panel, and the other has BGR sub pixel panel, which means
Windows ClearType need to take care both RGB and BGR for at the same time. I am not sure if this is fully supported by Windows 8.1 ClearType.
Is there any solution or workaround to make the font on both displays looks nice?
Thanks.

Hi,
Windows includes several technologies to render text on the screen. These include Windows GDI, Direct Write and Windows Presentation Foundation.
Windows GDI is limited to using one set of ClearType settings per system
while the other two support different settings per display.
It depends. Most LCD screens have a RGB striping order. A very small number have a striping order of BGR.
For more question, refer to this link:
ClearType FAQ
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/ClearTypeFAQ.mspx
Kate Li
TechNet Community Support

Questions about typography

Hi,
I was wondering what is the exact meaning of the FontMetrics.getAscent() method. The documentation says that "The font ascent is the distance from the font's baseline to the top of most alphanumeric characters".
1. So, It's not possible to calculate the ascent of a single char like 'g' ?
2. FontMetrics.getAscent() returns an integer, but what does exactly mean this number? Pixels?
Another related question about typography in Java:
Is it possible to print a char with some rotation? e.g. print 'g' with a rotation of 90 degrees.
Thanks in advance,
Roger

Actually, technically, you probably can't get the ascent of 'g'....
From the API docs...
"The ascent is the distance from the baseline to the ascender line. The ascent usually represents the the height of the capital letters of the text. Some characters can extend above the ascender line."
So it more or less is this:
ascent --- ####### #              ----------------\
               #    #                               |
               #    #                               |
               #    #####   ###                     |
               #    #    # #   #                    |
               #    #    # #   #                    |
baseline ---   #    #    # ####                    |
                               #                    |-- height
                               #                    |
descent ---                 ###    -\               |
                                     |-- leading*   |
ascent --- ####### #              -/ --------------/
baseline ---   #    #    # ####
descent ---                 ###* leading, in the Java APIs docs, appears to be from descent to ascent, but I'm thinking (it's been a while) that this is not the proper traditional definition of leading. I thought it as from baseline to baseline. What they call leading I think is really line gap, but I forget the exact details.
Unfortunately, I can't find any site that gives decent info on fonts, it's all free font sites.

Mid-2010 Macbook Pro Screen Flicker Pixel Seizure

Not sure how else to describe the problem, but I hope the title helps!
I have a mid-2010 15" MacBook Pro. I noticed in the last month or so, my screen would flicker. But not the entire screen. Just certain areas, like the pixels would jump/lag, as if it it would jump to the correct position. I don't know what's the word for it: glitter, pixel, flicker, seizure. I mean, that what it looks like. It actually hurts my eyes.
I don't know what could be the problem or if anyone knows what's going on. It's just certain pixels (random on the screen, but usually right in the middle) that get "stuck" and half a second later, jump. Not sure what the proper word is, but if anyone could identify it, that'll be great.
Safari, Chrome, and Word are the applications I use, and I've seen it all three programs. It's becoming a lot more noticeable and frequent now, especially if I switch programs or if I'm loading a new page.
The MBP is a tank, but I've been considering buying a new MacBook, preferably the Air, until this MBP kicks it, so if anyone has estimation on its shelf life, that'll be great (My 2005 Powerbook G4 barely made it through 4 years!). The warranty on the MBP just expired last year.
Thanks in advance, I appreciate any insight on the issue.

Curiously, I don't have that option. It only gives me the option to disable Automatic graphics switching where it should give the better battery life or higher performance options. Do I have something disabled that gets rid of that option? It's the same under the Battery or Power Adapter options.
I'm going to take it to a genius but I'm wondering from reading other forums that maybe one of my RAM slots is bad. I want to have a play but will the genius know if I've opened it up and then possibly refuse it? If it is bad RAM then I can fix that myself without having to travel 70 miles to my nearest Apple Store. Is there a seal that I would break that would give away the fact that I've opened it up?
Thanks for the advice so far.

Edit and output video without modifying any pixels?

That subject line sounds cryptic, I'm sure, but I need to assemble numerous snippets of animated pixel art into what should become a somewhat lengthy animation. Final Cut should perform no internal resizing and no compression prior to output; all input files are 240x160 without exception. Stills are PNG to take advantage of the Alpha channel, but the animated clips are uncompressed QuickTime with a single, unique RGB value reserved for the background for chroma-keying (all layering is to be all-or-nothing with regard to the Alpha/keying; there is no partial transparency at play).
All I need is to compile these clips together, layer a few elements on top of each other, and tweak the timing here and there. Beyond that, Final Cut should leave everything exactly like it found it, down to the pixel. (I'll worry about the output format and compression later.)
Is this possible (and easy) in Final Cut Express? In my disastrous trials with Adobe Premiere Elements (v.1), Premiere insisted on internally resizing the clips for editing, which fuzzed up the images and defeated the chroma keying (as if the fuzziness wasn't bothersome enough). It's possible this was due to user error, but as far as I can tell, nothing can prevent Premiere from reprocessing everything into its native DV dimensions, which is quite destructive toward pixel art. Anyway, I'm frustrated enough with Premiere that I'm willing to purchase Final Cut, if it can meet these requirements easily.
Thanks much for any information you can provide. Oh, and if Final Cut could possibly output the entire sequence as an animated GIF, that'd be fantastic, but I tend to think it'd be a little too heavy-handed (even though my total palette is well below 256 colors) because it's used to crunching fancy true-color videos instead of this basic pixel art.

After some further research, it seems my best approach for this project will be to compose my small QuickTime clips with all layering done beforehand, then assemble them with a utility such as QuickTime Pro or MPEG Streamclip, as discussed here:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=7813920&#7813920
MPEG Streamclip, in fact, seems to work quite well in my initial tests. If the clips are numbered sequentially, dropping them into the application assembles them beautifully. And it's free!
Thanks again to those who replied.

Can you temporarily overexpose a pixel in ACR?

I was working on some images the other day when it occurred to me that I was influencing some of the pixels brightness in several different ways: using the Exposure slider, the Recovery slider, using an exposure Gradient, using the Adjustment Brush, etc., each one making some exposure compensation.
I assume the order in which the controls are laid out doesn't necessarily represent the order the different controls' process settings are applied, but what started to worry me was a scenario in which one setting pushed exposure over 100% (i.e. clipped) before another brought it back down again (still clipped).
So, what I'm trying to ask is: is there a combination of exposure settings to avoid? For example, is it a bad idea to boost the exposure in the basic panel only to reduce it again with a gradient - or would it be better to use a negative gradient instead? That's just one example; are there any other potential pitfalls with different combinations, or does ACR work around this problem with some clever jiggerypokery?

The preview image is re-rendered using the entire combination of settings every time you move a control.
If you move one control (e.g. Exposure) and that leads to a block of pixels being "whited-out", then you move another control (e.g., Recovery) that undoes that condition, then you haven't "overexposed" anything.
Move the controls around freely until you like what you see in the preview and histogram, then press Open or Save. It's really as simple as that.
-Noel

How do I find the pixel size of a photo?

I have taken a photo or found one online.
It's now on my ipad.
How do I tell the pixel resoution of the photo via the ipad?
I have two of the same photos on my device at the moment and want to delete one. They may both be 2048/2048, but without emailing them or putting them in Dropbox, and viewing on my laptop, I don't see how to tell.

Get the Actual Pixels App from the App Store. It's free and will tell you the pixel size of any photo you open.
https://itunes.apple.com/ca/app/actual-pixels/id608679577?mt=8

IMAQ Resample performance. Any better choice for 50% downsample? (average 2x2 - 1 pixel)

My video source is a 4 Mpixel (2k x 2k resolution) USB3 camera. This is displaying a live image OK in Labview at 45 fps using only 20% CPU. So far, so good.
I added a "IMAQ Resample" block to downsize this to 1024 x 1024 image. That works with almost no additional processing time if I select "Zero Order" interpolation (eg. plain subsample to value of nearest pixel). However, I want to average each 2x2 block (4 pixels) in the input image into 1 output pixel. I *think* that is the effect of selecting Bi-Linear interpolation. Doing that works, but takes about 45% of CPU. I want to do some other processing but am worried I will quickly run out of CPU time and start dropping frames.
Is there any better way to do this simple 50% downsize (2x2 average), that would take less CPU overhead, or is this the best way?

Hi jbeale1,
In NI-MAX (Measurement & Automation Explorer) select your camera. Under the 'Acquistion Attributes' tab do you see an option to change the Video Mode of your camera to a different resolution? If your camera supports it, it would be more efficient to change the resolution there.
If not , here is a little more info regarding the IMAQ Resample VI:
http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/370281P-01/imaqvision/imaq_resample/
You are correct, the Bi-Linear option uses a more intensive interpolation technique which is why it is more taxing on your CPU. I hope this is helpful.
Robert S.
Applications Engineer
National Instruments

Crazy purple pixels cant tell if hardware or software.

just out of nowhere pixels on my screen turn purple. when im watching somthing with video you can really see how the pixels bounce around (lines, blurryness). i archived and installed, same issue. it just seems to turn whole shapes purple somtimes. Like when i start up the apple logo is purple....
should i try erase and install?
i think its the video card. there is no damage to the LCD at all.
if i take a screenshot and veiw the screenshot on another computer and it looks the same, that means it is somthing internal and not the actual lcd right?
im really worried, never had any troubles with my baby before.

Theo, Welcome to the discussion area!
Boot from the Apple Hardware Test disc and see what the test results are.

Pixelated Line Art in Photo Gallery

Hi
I am designing a photo gallery that externally loads jpegs
via XML. I have an actionscript that allows the jpegs to randomly
rotate at an angle as they load onto the stage. The jpegs contain
mostly logos that are line art. It works great but the images are
pixelated when they are at an angle since they are logos/line art.
I can't seem to find a solution to solve this pixelation problem. I
tried loading gif files instead but for some reason gifs does not
load correctly.
Any ideas? Thanks!

Hi dzedward
Thanks for your reply. I attempted to create an
emptyMovieClip and applied cacheAsBitmap in context of the
actionScipt that already exist in the file. I tried to follow the
examples in the Flash 8 documentation but failed. The photo gallery
I am editing from can be downloaded here:
http://www.ffiles.com/flash/photo_galleries/xml_gallery_2/
Please help. Thanks

New T530 with dead / unresponsive pixel in upper middle of screen

I have one dead or unresponsive pixel in the upper middle part of the screen. It is stuck in red color. It is very difficult to ignore this red dot and it is very annoying to use my machine with this red dot on the screen. What can I do?
I ordered my T530 on July 27th and received it on Aug 20th. I've used it for two days and used UDpixel or similar online tools in attempt to unstuck this red pixel. The pixel is still stuck in red. What can I do about this? Need help. I need to use my laptop for school.
Thanks.
Processor
Intel Core i5-3210M
Operating system
Windows 7 Home Premium 64
Operating system Language
Win7 HP64 English
Total memory
4 GB PC3-12800 DDR3 (1 DIMM)
Hard drive
320GB HDD 7200rpm
Optical device
DVD Recordable, UBE w/SWR
Battery
6cell LI Battery TWL70+
Bluetooth
NONE
WiFi wireless LAN adapters
Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6205
Wireless WAN accessories
Mobile Broadband upgradable
Warranty Type
1 Year Depot/Express Warranty
Custom images
NONE
AC Adapter and Power Cord
90W AC Adpt US (2pin)
Accessible Optimized Preload
NONE
Adobe Elements
NONE
Camera
TW530 720p HD Camera Mic
Color Sensor
TW530 No Color Sensor
Custom Image Language
NONE
Display Panel
TW530 15.6HD+ Anti-Glare, WWAN
Keyboard Language
KYB (Backlit) US English
Microsoft Office
NONE
Microsoft Windows 7 XP Mode
NONE
Pointing device
TW530 UNav w/ FPR
Protection Services
NONE
Publication Language
Pub; US English
Reserved Char 1
NONE
SIM Card for WWAN 2
NONE
Security Chip 2
Security Chip Enabled
Shipping Country
USA
Software Application
NONE
Storage Adapter
16GB Micro SSD SATA3
System Unit
T530 NVIDIA Optimus with 1GB
System expansion slots
TW530 Exp CS & 4-1 CR
Windows 7 Recovery DVD
NONE
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Hey Hiplease,
If you computer is under warranty which if your dates are this year then there is a good chance you can get it sent in for repair.
Here is a link that you could read about LCD replacement:
http://support.lenovo.com/en_US/detail.page?LegacyDocID=MIGR-69856
Here are the service number you can call:
http://support.lenovo.com/en_US/feedback/detail.page?LegacyDocID=MIGR-76613
If you have any other questions please post back and we will be more then happy to help.
Best Regards,
Hiro
Did you find a post Awesome? A response just Outstanding? Kudo them!
Did the post you read answer your question? Did someone help you figure out your problem? Hit Solution Provided and give that person a pat on the back for helping you out!

Typography pixelated

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for