ClearType vs autism/OCD/sensory issues

Post Reply New Topic

ClearType is the MS Windows facility for performing font smoothing via sub-pixel rendering. On most screens it is a necessity for any level of readability. However, I find that no matter how I tune it I'm incredibly distracted or hampered by the inconsistencies. Two of the same letter, just a character or two apart will be rendered differently! As an example, an 'i' may have the left side blurred/lightened/discolored and then two letters later, the right side will be blurred/lightened/discolored. I'm finding it greatly increases fatigue, because I have to concentrate much harder to read. Does anyone else notice this, and are there any suggestions please? Please note I'm already using the tuning utility & I've tried different variations.

(side rant: it's incredibly annoying in the tuning utility when you have two choices and one has a red colored box around it to indicate it is the current chosen one; it's as if they've never studied optical processing and how said box affects perception of what's inside. makes an accurate comparison really difficult).

I haven't used Windows or Cleartype for a long time but when I did, I never liked it. Things just looked weird. I never have been a fan of anti-aliasing. I didn't like MacOS X's anti-aliasing either, but I preferred it to Cleartype, as the subpixel rendering made things look funny colours.

However I've been using Debian for the last 5 years or so, and the fonts and anti-aliasing which that provides are lovely .

Debian is my distro of choice, too. But my current employer is largely a Windows-only shop, and without ClearType text looks like this:

With ClearType, it's better but still really fatigue inducing:

In Debian it is possible to change between subpixel rendering and greyscale (which I use), as well as other things such as the amount of hinting. Does Windows offer similar adjustments?

Ha, ha, ha...no. Microsoft's idea of allowing the user control over their own environment is to provide anywhere from two to eight choices in rendering and allowing the user to choose one. Sort of like an optometrist's "which is better,1...or...2?" flip testing. They seem to adjust the amount of hinting, but in all cases the same character end up looking substantially different (to my eyes) each time it displays in a word / line / paragraph. I've not dug into it but I assume the extra rendering is based on what is nearby, similar in effect to jpeg lossy compression?

A high pixel density monitor might help.

Thank you, but at my work I.T. is last in line for some hardware, like better monitors (because they are visible and therefore confer status). Your point is an excelling one though, as I (now, thanks to you) notice I don't have the problem at home or on laptops with higher resolution/density for the same size screen. I may try to snag one of the graphics department's cast-offs.

In the meantime, I'm trying out gdipp. It's a GNU'd alternative renderer that is closer to what OSX & Linux use. Slightly blurrier, but far more consistent across multiple instances of the same character in a line or paragraph.