image quality again

[Oval]

The question was not how to achieve quality in Photoline and other apps. The question is why users don’t know how to achieve small “crisp” texts in AD like demonstrated in post 4. The answer is: The workflow is not easily represented by the UI of the Affinity apps.
 
Affinity can. Even crisper (lower line) than in the example of Herbert123 (upper line):
 

[paolo.limoncelli]

Hi Oval,

 

I'm trying to follow this discussion but the German/English bouncing makes it a bit difficult, so please forgive me in advance if I misunderstood the point here.

 

What do you mean with

 

why users don’t know how to achieve small “crisp” texts in AD

 

 

It's an interesting point...

[Oval]

What do you mean with "why users don’t know how to achieve small “crisp” texts in AD”

 

 

It's an interesting point...

 

I can’t really figure out if this is a statement or a question, but quickly this:

 

0. Some people posted their difficulties with blurred texts and did not get satisfying answers.

1. If you compare the smallest texts in the files of post #1, you will conclude that Shahin missed something.

2. The blend ranges are not very helpful for many users/cases.

3. If we had something like a sharpness slider for texts, nobody would have asked.

[paolo.limoncelli]

Clear, now I can tell my point of view.

I do agree with you, Blend Ranges are not immediate because most users associate those with photo compositing techniques.

 

Anyway that sharpness slider is currently in AD but probably in a not really handy place.

You can choose your text blend gamma via Preferences > Tools, but have to create a new text object anytime.

 

 

A nice place to live could be the contextual bar.

I think that resampling during export is still the best workflow, so I'd love to see blend gamma slider there too (obviously even in export persona).

With this setting available I could choose the best rendering for each version I need, keeping a global one for source files/design purposes.

 

In this case I resampled to 320px in export this arboard (512px), I would have chosen something between 1 and 1.45 to have a crisp text.

 

 

 

I've read somewhere in the forum that Export will feature preview too in the future.

[Oval]

The blend gamma changed the weight of your texts and cannot replace a sharpness slider for texts.

[R C-R]

The blend gamma changed the weight of your texts and cannot replace a sharpness slider for texts.

In the context of rasterized output, I'm not sure what a text sharpness slider would or could do, other than change the apparent weight due to anti-aliasing effects.

 

Can someone explain to me how this would work without doing that? A pixel can only be one color, right?

[paolo.limoncelli]

The blend gamma changed the weight of your texts and cannot replace a sharpness slider for texts.

 

In this case I want both...  :)

[Oval]

A pixel can only be one color, right?

 

Then pictures should not be sharpened with filters and lanczos. There is not only your pixel. There are pixels around your pixel that are relevant for the contrasts humans see, not how computers work, because this is the easiest way for developers. It is about typography.

[R C-R]

Then pictures should not be sharpened with filters and lanczos. There is not only your pixel. There are pixels around your pixel that are relevant for the contrasts humans see, not how computers work, because this is the easiest way for developers. It is about typography.

I understand all that. However, when the text is rasterized the only choice is to anti-alias it or not. No anti-alising will produce very sharp edges but they will have the characteristic jagged, stair-stepped effect of aliased objects. That will make all but the most blocky fonts look terrible at all but the smallest font sizes, as if they were printed with a 1980's dot-matrix printer.

[Oval]

the only choice is to anti-alias it or not.

 

No anti-alising

 

OK, this is your opinion, but this is not a better solution for sharp text than in PS. It is no solution. If you don’t need it, be unconcerned about realizing it from a technical point of view. Perhaps hinting would the next thing you do not need.

 

There is still no easy way to switch off anti-aliasing.

[R C-R]

"Perhaps hinting would the next thing you do not need."

 

I'm not sure how this is relevant. Font hinting is a form of anti-aliasing, one that trades off sacrificing font shape fidelity for higher contrast. And as far as I know, it only applies to vector fonts, which means it needs to be applied before rasterizing the export, right?

 

When all is said & done, it still seems like a careful choice of the font used for small text in a rasterized export is the most effective way to deal with this.

[Oval]

I'm not sure how this is relevant. 

 

For users that want or need it, but cannot be achieved in an "effective way” because it is not supported – even not automatically. Without something like a hint feature for small text the user has too much work to achieve quality or he only gets poor small texts.

Of course, a truism, the choice of legible fonts is important. But it is unimportant when users switch back to PS, because they have difficulties to achieve its level. The examples in post 1 and 29 show that there is still a long way to achieve crisp texts.

[paolo.limoncelli]

For users that want or need it, but cannot be achieved in an "effective way” because it is not supported – even not automatically.

 

Of course, a truism, the choice of legible fonts is important. But it is unimportant when users switch back to PS, because they have difficulties to achieve its level. The examples in post 1 and 29 show that there is still a long way to achieve crisp texts.

 

 

I do agree for more options and features to have the best flexibility in the galaxy, but I equally think that if something goes unreadable under certain resolutions there is a problem in design strategy... 

If you're designing for multiple resolutions (and these include text or vectors) starting from lower res then upscale when exporting is probably a better path.

 

You can tweak the best solution in the worst scenario.

Everything else will be fine for sure. 

[Mallefizz]

Hi,

I guess I have the same problem and couldn't find the solution.

It's 2020 now shouldn't there be one by now?

At the moment I am trying to export product Foto with a small vector club logo an it form Affinity Designer to PNG but all the different optionions I try I don not get any crisp result.

Why?

 

when I export to PDF ist works.

From there I can use Apple's own Preview App to covert from PDF to PNG and it works.

 

Why not directly out of affinity designer?

what am I doing wrong?

 

Thanks for your Help.

 

[R C-R]

1 hour ago, Mallefizz said:

At the moment I am trying to export product Foto with a small vector club logo an it form Affinity Designer to PNG but all the different optionions I try I don not get any crisp result.

Why?

Because the PNG format does not support vector objects.

[MEB]

Hi Mallefizz,
Welcome to Affinity Forums
Are you resizing the document on export (to PNG)? if so what Resample method are you using (the Resample dropdown in the export dialog)? Is the logo small in size? It would help if you could attach the document you are trying to export as PNG.