Alain escribió:
> Bold is harder to do. The characters remain about the same size, but the 
> lines are thicker. A way would be to scale up horizontaly and reduce the 
> spacing between the characters. It will be more like "whide condenced"

How about multiple text objects, each moved horizontally by a small amount?

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> wrote:
> Alain escribió:
> > Bold is harder to do. The characters remain about the same size, but the
> > lines are thicker. A way would be to scale up horizontaly and reduce the
> > spacing between the characters. It will be more like "whide condenced"

That is what Tim Attwood's example code does.

>
> How about multiple text objects, each moved horizontally by a small amount?

But then you get into the how many is enough?

There was an old joke asking "how many electricians does it require to change a
lightbulb?" The joke was recycled into many different scenarios and
trades-people.

The real answer would seem to be a question: "how many are you willing to pay
for?"

p.s. I apologize to the many electricians and trades-people who have endured
this joke over the years.

Leef_me

Post a reply to this message

"Leef_me" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message 
news:web.4759b63117d569dd2a7b15450@news.povray.org...
> "pan" <pan### [at] syixcom> wrote:
>> "Leef_me" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
>
>> >
>> > I understand that there are some fonts with separate files 
>> > like
>> > these.
>> > The particular font I wanted to use, doesn't happen to do it 
>> > this
>> > way.
>> >
>> > Leef_me
>> >
>> >
>> What's the font?
>> Some of us have collections of typefaces ...
>
> It has Curlz in the name, but it's a uSoft font packaged with 
> some uSoft
> products. Based on that thought, it's surely copyright and 
> trading is likely a
> no-no. I appreciate the thought, but Tim Attwood's code will 
> suffice or I'll
> make do with 'normal' or using a generated picture.
>
> Leef_me
>
>

Copyright isn't the point. Typefaces & fonts have been around a 
long time
and there are many, many instances of parallel/duplicate 
development.
So much so that an the identical appearance can (and does) have a
number of names. Some of us have been around long enough that by
sheer repetitiveness a font by one name can be visually recognized
as an analogue of another name.

That's o.k. though - it is tedious to inspect many to find one that 
has
the same kerning, form, etc. etc.

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Doing italic text object in POV-Ray is easy:

> text { ttf "arial.ttf","Some text",.1,0
>    matrix <1,0,0, .1,1,0, 0,0,1, 0,0,0>
> }

  Technically speaking that's a slanted/oblique font, not an italic
(ie. cursive) font.
  (Although admittedly the difference between these two things can be
quite subtle to the layman.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Among other things, Warp saw fit to write:

>   Technically speaking that's a slanted/oblique font, not an italic
> (ie. cursive) font.
>   (Although admittedly the difference between these two things can be
> quite subtle to the layman.)

But it's usually obvious for some letters, such as "a" and "f". Italic fonts
have a certain hand-written look.

-- 
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby

Post a reply to this message

Jellby <me### [at] privacynet> wrote:
> But it's usually obvious for some letters, such as "a" and "f". Italic fonts
> have a certain hand-written look.

  Depending on the font there can indeed be visible differences between
slanted and cursive versions of the same font, especially when put side
by side. While computers will often emulate a cursive font by slanting
it (when there's no cursive version of the font available), a cursive
version of a given font should technically be its own separate font with
its own design (which is not just a slanted version of the original font).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Jellby <me### [at] privacynet> wrote:
> > But it's usually obvious for some letters, such as "a" and "f". Italic fonts
> > have a certain hand-written look.
>
>   Depending on the font there can indeed be visible differences between
> slanted and cursive versions of the same font, especially when put side
> by side. While computers will often emulate a cursive font by slanting
> it (when there's no cursive version of the font available), a cursive
> version of a given font should technically be its own separate font with
> its own design (which is not just a slanted version of the original font).
>
> --
>                                                           - Warp

When I said thanks to Tim for his example, I expected to thread to die.
I'm glad that wasn't the case this time. I'm still learning things from the rest
of the thread.   Unfortunately, for expediancy, I am planning to use
my fall-back plan of an image of the text.

Leef_me

-------------------
Lt. Cmdr. Data [polite tone] Could you please continue your petty bickering? I
find it intriguing.

Post a reply to this message