Because Lido wasn't designed to take advantage of ClearType. (My guess.)

I've tested un-clear-typing my system and Lido looks the same.

-- David

This sample shows problems on the vertical axis, but ClearType is currently designed to help only on the horizontal axis. It appears that this particular font is simply poorly hinted.

" ClearType is currently designed to help only on the horizontal axis."
Not exactly. CT is engineered to give more resolution to the horizontal axis, and to use more hints in the vertical axis.

"this particular font is simply poorly hinted." "I’ve tested un-clear-typing my system and Lido looks the same."
Exactly. CT does not do a good job rendering normal TT fonts unless they have dynamite vertical hints and a lack of horizontal complexity in the design until around 30-40 pixels per em. And sans normal TT hinted fonts are best...

I'd like to see how the font rendered with CT off.

Cheers, Si

Just grab yourself a free copy from
http://www.myfonts.com/fonts/storm/lido-stf/

Lido is a text font that was not designed for system-wide display use. Print it out on a hi-res laser or inkjet and your opinion of the font will change.

I often use Macintosh systems, so I don't think fonts should need hints.
;)

Thanks for the link though. Storm Type Foundry does some nice work.
http://www.stormtype.com/
I wasn't aware of this.

It's just badly hinted, causing inconsistent x-height at typical screen res. Nothing to do with ClearType per se, as the same problem shows up without ClearType under Windows.

TrueType hinting is tricky, mind you. But even with FontLab auto-hinting I'd think one should be able to avoid this, as long as various font-wide parameters are set correctly.

Regards,

T

Thanks. So it's just a viewing thing?
-- David

"Thanks. So it’s just a viewing thing?"

if your primary output is print, yes it is a "viewing thing".

how can I fix it?

Use a bigger type size, and move further away from the screen :-)

Or get a higher-resolution screen.

For example: My Dell Inspiron 9100 laptop has a 17" screen with pixel dimensions of 1920×1200. That works out to a resolution of 148 pixels per inch; with ClearType enabled it's even higher. On that screen, even the worst-hinted fonts don't look half bad.

The trick is to get a display that can cram the most pixels into the smallest physical display area. (Generally speaking, bigger is not better.)

...but your cheapest fix is probably to take the font you like, strip out all the hints and use it that way...

Thanks, everyone.

-- David

My guess is that this font is autohinted in FontLab, and that the alignment zones have not been correctly set by the person who made the font, such that, for example, the top of the lowercase y is slightly below the bottom of the x-height alignment zone, so is not being correctly aligned.

FontLab autohinting works best if you manually set up the alignment zones ahead of time.

> The trick is to get a display that can cram the most
> pixels into the smallest physical display area.

The trick to what - working out your neck muscles? Very high ppi numbers can backfire in many real-world situations. I have the same Dell as you (although it's called E1705) but I intentionally chose the 1440×900 display: more than just saving the measley $150, I think I'm saving a lot on Tylenol. :-)

hhp