Create Outline makes text bigger/bolder?

[Roger]

Hi,

Got a quick question. I am making a document that needs to be printed
(CMYK). In order to avoid type and font issues I have opted to convert all
the type in my document to outlines. However, it seems both on screen and in
a proof-print on my ink-jet that this makes the type considerably bolder and
darker. Is my observation correct? If so, is there anything I can do change
this? If not, then why does it look that way on screen and paper?

Thank you,

Rogier

[Christopher Bunzel]

Hi,

fonts include hinting informations which rule the way, a font is
outputted if the font is small related to the resolution of the output
device.
If you convert to outline, these informations get lost. The outline is
drawn with the thickness of a pixel of your output device, so that small
fonts look bolder.

Greetings Bunz

Roger schrieb:

[Dave Saunders]

Assuming that you're not inadvertently adding a stroke to the text, then the effect you're seeing is something that only happens at low resolution. It's caused by the differences between the algorithms used to paint glyphs from fonts (an algorithm that takes advantage of "hints" in the fonts to optimize the shape of the characters when there aren't many pixels or dots to go around) and that used to paint shapes.

However, the largest variation you'll ever see is two pixels (or dots) wide and it averages to less than one pixel (or dot).

So, when you're printing at 1200 dots per inch or more, the effect is just about invisible to everybody (some type specialist can still see the difference at 1200), but on screen and on an ink jet the effect is quite visible.

Dave

[John Kallios]

Conveting text to outlines does make them appear and print bolder for the small pt sizes.

It does not matter at any resolution you print at. It is always noticable. (some fonts more than others, but still noticable)

John

[Dave Saunders]

John,

Of course the resolution makes all the difference because of the number of dots any particular font size uses. 8 point type at 1200 dpi is the same as 16 point at 2400, so if you print 8 point outlined type at 2400 dpi, the effect is 1/4 (because we're talking area) that at 1200 dpi where it would already be hardly noticeable.

Dave

[John Kallios]

Dave

Are we talking about the same thing?

Fonts that are converted to outlines BEFORE they are printed.

Not fonts printed to lower resolution output devices.

John

[Dave Saunders]

I'm talking about the resolution of the output device. The greater the resolution, the less the impact of the outlining. The outlining on average increases the weight of a character by somewhere between .5 of a dot and 1 dot. The smaller the dot, the less the impact.

That's why it looks gross on screen reasonable on a 600 dpi laser and just about undetectable on a 2400 dpi device.

Dave

[Art Schneider]

Roger,

In my opinion, this is why text looks (and prints) DIFFERENT when converted to outlines when you have strokes:

When type is type (not outlines) any stroke goes from the "edge" of the letter/glyph outwards.

When the type is converted to outlines, the "center" of the stroke shifts to the edge of the glyph, in a sense shrinking inwards.

I hope this clears up some issues.

My advice: Never convert to outlines unless it is completely necessary.

Art

[Dave Saunders]

Actually, the change is application dependent. Some applications tend to make type lighter while others make it heavier. The one thing you can say for sure is that it changes.

The biggest impact is in the loss of hinting. But hinting is specifically intended for making type look better at low resolutions. Another reason why the higher the resolution, the less this matters. The largest possible difference (unless the application does something really, really weird) is one dot on the output device, either heavier or lighter.

Dave

[John Kallios]

Dave

I am not in agreement that you cannot see a difference at a high resolution output device. I see a difference.

If you want, you can email a simple test file with a 2 identical blocks of text except 1 converted to outlines. I will output at 2400 dpi and mail you the piece of film.

You then can post the results back on this forum to say either I am full of it or a difference is apparent.

jo...@orionprinting.com

John

[Dave Saunders]

John,

In the text where you're seeing the difference, no stroke was applied to the converted text, right?

Perhaps there's a difference being introduced by some other factor, such as anti-aliasing of the font versus none for the outlined version.

I just have a hard time believing that the difference of 1/2400 of an inch is visible -- but there could be other factors at work that I'm not taking into consideration.

What RIP are you using?

One way to test this on a 600 dpi laser printer is to print something at 32 point and compare -- that's the equivalent of 8 point at 2400. I'll do that later today and see if I can see a difference on my laser.

Dave

[John Kallios]

Well Dave,

You can now post back that I do not know what I am talking about.

In the text where you're seeing the difference, no stroke was applied
to the converted text, right?

NO, this is not the case.

I have experience text converted to outline printing bolder on my imagesetter. But these files were mainly Illustrator eps files text converted to outlines and outputted through Quark.

I just outputted a simple InDesign text file with text to outline and the difference is not noticable to the consumer. I still see a difference, but not what I was talking about before.

Hey, I do not mind eating crow. Now it is back to do some testing to replicate the boldness problem through Quark and determine a workaround for my problem.

John

[John Kallios]

I am back to recant my eating crow statement.

The boldness is still noticable. It is just easier to see in the film when I output positive film instead of negative film.

So, prove me wrong Dave. I would love to output text converted to outlines to appear the same as text is outputted.

John

[Dave Saunders]

John,

Just probing to be sure we're talking about the same thing: are you doing the comparison through a loupe or with the naked eye at a reasonable reading distance?

Dave

[John Kallios]

Dave,

Seen with the naked eye at a reasonable reading distance.

The difference in boldness visible in a little less between looking at a medium font versus a regular font.

It is easier to notice if you only convert half a word to outlines.

John

Edit: by the way, I just fried my keyboard. lucky I had a spare from an Imac and used it to swap the keyboard out from another imac with a full size keyboard.

[Dave Saunders]

Actually, it occurs to me to do some arithmetic:

For the sake of argument, lets say that 8 point type is actually 8 points tall (of course, in reality it's smaller, so we'll make an adjustment at the end). 8 points is a ninth of an inch. So, a full height 8 point character consumes 2400/9 dots = 267 dots.

So, can one see the difference between 266 and 267 dots?

Yes you can, but that's not the right question to ask. A stroke in an 8 point character is (for argument's sake) about 0.75 points wide, so it takes 267/8*0.75 dots = 25 dots. So, given that the error of 1 dot that I was going on about all day can actually happen on either side of the same stroke, we're looking at a possible 2 point variation in 25, i.e, an 8% difference, and that is surely visible. To fair, though, it probably averages 4%, but that is still visible.

So, apologies, John. It is clearly to be expected that 8 point type will be visibly darker even at 2400 dpi.

16 point type would be 2% darker and 32 point type would be 1% darker.

At which percentage this becomes irrelevant, who can say -- it probably varies from person to person and from font to font -- the heavier the font, the less the effect. But there's no doubt that even at resolutions as high as 2400 dpi, outlining of text is far from benign at regular type sizes. It's OK for headlines, but not something to be recommended for smaller type.

Sorry for arguing so strongly based on a mistaken impression of how fine a resolution 2400 dpi really is.

Dave

[Dave Saunders]

That's odd. I could have sworn we were having this discussion in the Mac forum.

Anyway. You're right John. Even 64 point type is detectably bolder on my 600 dpi printer (although, it might not be noticed in practice).

32 point type is distinctly bolder, so that means that 8 point type at 2400 will also be distinctly bolder.

Now, the question is: have we discovered a bug or is this the way it's supposed to be? I'll investigate further.

Dave

[John Kallios]

No, Thank you Dave.

The explanation is enlightening. You have given me a better understanding on the sugject.

Thanks again,

John

[rolf langenhuijzen]

Very useful thread and investigation..

Thanks Dave & John

:)

Rolf