Bug 542398 - Fonts look smudgy regardless of settings (F11 with radeonhd was fine)
Summary: Fonts look smudgy regardless of settings (F11 with radeonhd was fine)
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: xorg-x11-drv-ati
Version: 14
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jérôme Glisse
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard: card_IGP600/MiI
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-11-29 16:43 UTC by Pekka Savola
Modified: 2012-08-16 21:56 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-08-16 21:56:46 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
smudgy/shadowy fonts in various apps and sizes. (625.64 KB, image/jpeg)
2009-11-29 16:43 UTC, Pekka Savola
no flags Details
Xorg.0.log (98.93 KB, text/plain)
2009-11-29 16:44 UTC, Pekka Savola
no flags Details
smolt profile (6.70 KB, text/plain)
2009-11-29 16:45 UTC, Pekka Savola
no flags Details
xorg.conf -- nothing special here (858 bytes, text/plain)
2009-11-29 16:46 UTC, Pekka Savola
no flags Details
screenshot w/ full hinting and subpixel anti-aliasing. (5.50 MB, image/png)
2009-12-01 22:09 UTC, Pekka Savola
no flags Details
screenshot w/ "best shapes" option (471.20 KB, image/png)
2009-12-02 19:56 UTC, Pekka Savola
no flags Details

Description Pekka Savola 2009-11-29 16:43:25 UTC
Created attachment 374584 [details]
smudgy/shadowy fonts in various apps and sizes.

Description of problem:
Fonts, especially small ones, look very smudgy and shadowy regardless of "System - Preferences - Appearance - Fonts" settings.

The component might be wrong but I don't know which one would be the right one.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

xorg-x11-drv-ati-6.13.0-0.11.20091119git437113124.fc12.i686
freetype-2.3.9-6.fc12.i686
xorg-x11-server-Xorg-1.7.1-9.fc12.i686

Additional info:

$ gconftool-2 -a  /desktop/gnome/font_rendering
 antialiasing = grayscale
 hinting = slight
 dpi = 96
 rgba_order = rgb

Changing these settings only make minor differences.

I have an AL2016W LCD screen connected with a VGA adapter (HDMI is not available), I hope this is not relevant here.  I'm running at 1600x1200@60

Disabling KMS does not seem to make a difference.

Changing the driver back to radeonhd does not seem to make a difference, so I wonder if this was related to the F12 upgrade or its subsequent updates.

Creating a new test user and logging in has the same result.

Comment 1 Pekka Savola 2009-11-29 16:44:07 UTC
Created attachment 374585 [details]
Xorg.0.log

Comment 2 Pekka Savola 2009-11-29 16:45:04 UTC
Created attachment 374586 [details]
smolt profile

Comment 3 Pekka Savola 2009-11-29 16:46:00 UTC
Created attachment 374587 [details]
xorg.conf -- nothing special here

Comment 4 Michal Schmidt 2009-11-30 09:00:25 UTC
Please do not use JPEG for screenshots. It uses lossy compression even with high quality setting. Use PNG with lossless compression instead.

Some people prefer fonts which look close in shape to how they were designed even at the cost of some blurriness. Other people prefer crisp fonts with pixel-aligned lines even at the cost of distortion.

Since you seem to belong in the second group, perhaps you should try stronger hinting and subpixel aa?

I wonder if you were using a modified freetype library with the patented bytecode interpreter enabled from a certain external repo in F11?

Comment 5 Pekka Savola 2009-11-30 09:06:39 UTC
In F11 I appear to have used freetype-2.3.9-5.fc11.i586, so bytecode shouldn't have been used.

I can do a new screenshot if necessary (I set the JPEG quality to 100%) in a couple of days.

As I mentioned, full hinting and subpixel aa didn't have significant impact on the crispness.

Comment 6 Michal Schmidt 2009-11-30 09:30:49 UTC
Hm, for me the appearance changes very significantly when I change the settings. Did you restart Firefox after changing the settings? Unlike Gnome applications, it is not clever enough to adjust its drawing at runtime.

Comment 7 James Wilkinson 2009-11-30 18:06:15 UTC
Hi there.

I think I'm seeing the same thing. I've got a few observations to make: would you mind seeing if you see the same?

If I use the radeon driver (e.g. from a Fedora 12 x86_64 live image, although this also happens if I choose the radeon driver in my existing Fedora 12 install), turn font rendering to monochrome (i.e. no anti-aliasing/smoothing) and look closely at the screen, the display is still fuzzy. If I look really closely at black-on-white text (e.g. in gnome-terminal), the pixel to the right of each vertical stroke is grey. If I take a screen shot and zoom right in, however, this does *not* come across in the screen-shot: the data in the screenshot is evidently monochrome. If I look at it with the radeon driver at normal resolution, however, we're back to fuzzy fonts.

If I set the driver to radeonhd, the fonts are as crisp as I specify. The pixels in a gnome-terminal using monochrome font rendering are either white or black. (To do this I need to put nomodeset on the kernel command line and come up with a minimal xorg.conf. Pekka, are you sure that you actually got X to use the radeonhd driver?)

My xorg.conf:
Section "Device"
    Identifier "foo"
    Driver "radeonhd"
    Option "DRI" "off
EndSection

I am using a DGM LCD monitor at the auto-detected 1440 x 900 native resolution through a VGA cable. I use x86_64.

The display with the radeon driver gives my eyes eye-strain: I do not consider it usable.

I think that the fuzziness is there on all vertical lines. I'm pretty sure it isn't a font rendering artifact. (Next time I have the time to reboot, I'll see what a vertical line in the GIMP looks like.)

$ lspci | grep VGA
01:05.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon HD 3200 Graphics
$ lspci -n | grep 01:05.0
01:05.0 0300: 1002:9610

Thanks for your attention.

Comment 8 Pekka Savola 2009-12-01 22:07:22 UTC
Michal: If I turn on full hinting and subpixel AA and restart firefox, crispness does not increase significantly.  The font changes noticeably but that's it.

Turning to "monochrome", it's ugly and also smudgy.  I don't see grey to the right of vertical strokes; I do see grey usually below or above horizontal lines.  This also disappears in a really close zoomed screenshots.  It's just black there.

I'm pretty sure about radeonhd, but I'll retest and report if there was a difference.

I'll attach a PNG screenshot (pretty big..) when full hinting and subpixel AA had been turned on and firefox had been restarted.

Comment 9 Pekka Savola 2009-12-01 22:09:59 UTC
Created attachment 375212 [details]
screenshot w/ full hinting and subpixel anti-aliasing.

Comment 10 Michal Schmidt 2009-12-02 09:46:40 UTC
Thanks for using PNG instead of JPEG this time. You misunderstood what I meant by lossless compression though. PNG uses lossless compression even if you set the "Compression level" slider in the "Save as PNG" dialog in Gimp to its maximum (9). The result would be only 441 KB and still pixel-perfect. Please use this setting for any future screenshots.

On my display the fonts in your screenshot look good to me. Do you have a chance to view your screenshot on another computer, preferably with a fully digital path to the display (DVI or HDMI, not VGA)? Would you say it looks better there? I am asking this to rule out subjective font appearance perception.

If it looks good when viewed on another system, this would confirm James's observation that the pixels are correct and the fuzziness is introduced somewhere further in the signal path. It seems the radeon driver is driving the VGA DAC suboptimally. There could a real difference between how radeon and radeonhd do it.

Comment 11 Pekka Savola 2009-12-02 16:13:36 UTC
I looked at it on another system, and the quality is much better, the main fonts are sharp.  The smallest fonts are not very good, but I'm not sure if it would even be possible.

RadeonHD is also showing the same behaviour as radeon.

One difference in xorg.conf (in F11) was that I had manually defined the monitor's sync values.  During testing, xorg.conf was rewritten and these were lost.  Autodetected values look OK, but I could try to find an earlier copy of xorg.conf or try to type them manually even though the monitor and its refresh values are autodetected.

Comment 12 Pekka Savola 2009-12-02 19:56:07 UTC
Created attachment 375574 [details]
screenshot w/ "best shapes" option

Comment 13 Pekka Savola 2009-12-02 20:25:05 UTC
I'll add that if I switch to 1680x1050 mode, the smudginess goes down to a bearable level.  The fonts seem "stretched out" though, having been used to 1600x1200.

Comment 14 Chris Campbell 2010-01-23 22:10:40 UTC

-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

Comment 15 James Wilkinson 2010-02-23 13:27:22 UTC
Looks like my problem was a different issue.

The radeon driver must drive the VGA output differently to radeonhd: I hadn't expected that the phase control on the monitor would need to be tweaked for the different driver.

Intriguingly, the smudginess was even there in a hi-res console!

James.

Comment 16 Bug Zapper 2010-11-04 04:57:46 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 12 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 12.  It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained.  At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 
'version' of '12'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 12's end of life.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 12 is end of life.  If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this 
bug to the applicable version.  If you are unable to change the version, 
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

Comment 17 Pekka Savola 2010-11-04 17:28:30 UTC
This still appears with 1600x1200 mode in F14. Going back to 1680x1050.

Comment 18 Fedora End Of Life 2012-08-16 21:56:48 UTC
This message is a notice that Fedora 14 is now at end of life. Fedora 
has stopped maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 14. It is 
Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no 
longer maintained.  At this time, all open bugs with a Fedora 'version'
of '14' have been closed as WONTFIX.

(Please note: Our normal process is to give advanced warning of this 
occurring, but we forgot to do that. A thousand apologies.)

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, feel free to reopen 
this bug and simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we were unable to fix it before Fedora 14 reached end of life. If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged to click on 
"Clone This Bug" (top right of this page) and open it against that 
version of Fedora.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.