The Flea's Knees - Handmade Subpixel Type Family with 3px x-height

miha's picture

It has x-height of 3 pixels, it is italic, inspired by old masters and most important – made by hand. You must not look too closely, because colors get visible. It's work in progress. Here:


I am also writing a program which will set text automatically. These horizontal lines in the picture is actually information about glyph unicode value and positioning.

It can be used in favicons and for … well, one reason is enough :-)

Scroll down for additional weights of roman, bold & bold italic.

The title was "First Handmade Subpixel Type Family, Ever*".
[* Moderator's note: Miha's enthusiastic use of the claim "first ever" has been seriously challenged by StoneCypher. Read on for the drama and sub-pixel intrigue, if you dare!]

PS: Ken Perlin's work is interesting too.

Comments

aluminum's picture

miha, did you beat up StoneCypher in Junior High or something? He seems to be holding a serious grudge.

StoneCypher, you seem to know your stuff. Maybe edit your replies down a bit and calm down on the rhetoric, though. We always welcome knowledge here. Not so much flame wars.

PandaBear's picture

StoneCypher:

Here's "Eve" which dependent on your belief system was the first woman ever created (not via Apple, but there was an Apple around somewhere).

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_sQEkFKSm1IA/R1Y8JNpdq6I/AAAAAAAAAYI/UXgaKONXra...

She is what is known nowadays as a "woman". Admittedly from the above image you are unable to tell the sex, it could actually be an image of yourself (check Facebook) trying to reach that little bit further to appease whatever your desires may be.

Now, back to the woman. Patent 5.33, 5.22, 2.43, 14.38, these women (collective term of more than one), although perhaps we'll stick with just 'woman' in your context, have powerful powers over men folk. This power is often called the "vagina".

http://anthro.palomar.edu/biobasis/images/female_reproductive_organs.gif (WARNING MAY UPSET)

Now as you will no doubt notice, it does look a little like a horned beast - perhaps a symbol used by your favourite heavy metal band. But that entire object fits neatly between the 'woman' legs, in place of her pee-pee.

After reading your comments about typography, fonts, and all that fun stuff, I come to the conclusion that your pent up anger and frustration is not always going to be sorted out by Baywatch reruns, and so may I suggest these following sites to help you on your way:

http://www.artofseductions.com/how-to-talk-to-girls/
http://www.ehow.com/how_5238428_speak-girls-stimulate-attraction.html
http://www.ehow.com/how_2095206_use-jokes-pick-up-girls.html
http://russianbrides.com/

Good luck with all of the above, and hopefully you will be able to once again return to this thread and join with the rest of us by telling miha what a great, and aesthetically pleasing job he has done.

StoneCypher's picture

Autacraft: this isn't error anymore. I said that originally when it was a mistake. Miha has been provided now seven counter-examples, two from the 1970s, yet retains a dishonest blog title (the third s/he chose) and retains dishonest notes in the blog post attributing this to Ken instead of Steve.

Aluminium: There is no rhetoric. I'm not sure why you guys keep telling me how to behave; I'm obviously not listening. I find it fascinating that you continue to focus on my tone, without saying a word to Miha about his/her now thoroughly displayed honesty. It isn't a question of error anymore. Miha has been told repeatedly, and continues in public to make false claims to other people's accomplishments.

Miha: Please stop lying about what you've achieved. You've been given more than 20 counter-examples, including a list of eighteen links which contains seven counter-examples to your current version of your claim.

It's time to change the post to something honest.

StoneCypher's picture

"Yet I stil haven’t seen an embedded image or the link to typographic family."

Then you aren't looking at the large list of links I gave; there are in fact quite a few.

Strange, there were also no direct responses to what I directly responded to him

I have responded to everything you've said to me, Miha. If there are specific things you'd like me to address, please mention them. However, the fact that you're now claiming on the heels of that enormous list of links, many of which go directly to lists of fonts, that you haven't seen any fonts suggests that the reason you think I'm not responding to you is you aren't bothering to read what I say.

I wish I could feel surprised.

Start with the web archive link. There are a list of type families right on that page. It's got images of all of them, and download links on the right.

Every single one of those links satisfies the criteria you've just lied and said I failed.

after he made almost two thousands words.

Time enough to count the words, but not to read them?

Aluminium: "miha, did you beat up StoneCypher in Junior High or something? He seems to be holding a serious grudge."

I already explained this. Miha is stealing credit for the work of my close friends, who are very angry about the matter but fundamentally non-confrontational. One of them punched a wall and broke a finger.

I should hope that if you ever have close friends who achieve something, and that some random person on the web gets caught repeatedly lying in public, then claims that they aren't seeing real counter-examples, you would be a good enough person to stand up for your friends too.

I will settle, however, for you ceasing to make comments like "did you beat him up in highschool", then proceeding to complain about my tone.

StoneCypher's picture

Another thing I find fascinating is that the vast bulk of what I'm writing is answering people's questions in a polite, helpful way, in far more detail and with far more correctness than the blog author. You guys all seem completely blind to that, and seem to want to attribute those words to me being a big mean bully at your poor little Miha.

Grow up. Plagiarists - that word means "someone who steals someone else's credit", not work - deserve a lot worse than a series of originally polite but increasingly disappointed comments giving concrete counter-examples.

Miha is lucky I'm not responding on every single blog that cross-posts this page. However, I'm getting to the point where I will no longer do Miha the courtesy of letting this be fixed by his/her own hand.

It is inappropriate for you all to defend a plagiarist against someone being "mean" to them, by being substantially meaner, all the while ignoring the significant dishonesty you're looking at because you're exposed to a modest quality subpixel font which hasn't even figured out the s/z stacking problem.

Each of you should ask yourself a question before admonishing me again with something I probably won't even bother to read: would you prefer pleasant lies or frank honesty?

Don't waste my time telling me it's about my tone again, or repeating my own words about error being human; my tone didn't begin until after Miha had repeated the dishonesty once, and you can't make an error of understanding twice in a row, let alone three times as you all seem to want to believe Miha has.

It isn't the first subpixel font ever. That was changed.

It isn't the first subpixel font family ever. That was changed.

It isn't the first hand-made subpixel font family ever. Miha has been repeatedly informed of this, but continues to make the claim in public.

This is the sort of behavior one expects from Fox News participants: "don't you put facts in front of my hero! you're mean to the person who keeps making sweeping claims without research after learning they're wrong! don't call the person lying a liar!"

Yeah, yeah.

I may be mean, but at least I'm honest.

Frode Bo Helland's picture

John, if you would read my post again I said “I think your argument is absolutely fine”. Miha is just a young student, and you should cut him some slack!

autacraft's picture

StoneCypher!....will you cool your boots! seriously!

Has it not occurred to you, that perhaps - just perhaps! - the reason Miha hasn't altered the post title, is because people generally don't respond too well the demanding (and almost paranoid!) behaviour you display. The more you harp on about 'rights/wrongs' in the manner that you are doing, equally people will continue to burn you down regarding your attitude, myself included.

Few people are even disputing your 'honest'points (albeit ranted) but your histrionics and arrogance is now becoming boring, seriously. Put your dummy back in and shush please. If you cant stop crying about the damned title, then email admin. Your obsession is slightly disturbing.

PandaBear's picture

>>> One of them punched a wall and broke a finger.

Oh really? mhmmm...

miha's picture

Has it not occurred to you [to John Haugeland], that perhaps - just perhaps! - the reason Miha hasn’t altered the post title, is because people generally don’t respond too well the demanding (and almost paranoid!) behaviour you display.

The reason is I haven't yet seen a handmade supixel type family other than mine.

And if his series of posts weren't so impolite, I could easily, just like that, change it to somethink else. But now I have to see the proof. Image (or link to image), 1x zoom, lossless, all styles, link to site where it says it was handmade.

Nathan: I am working on it, be patient :-) Also, read this comment.

I think this is the right time that moderators say something.

myobie's picture

StoneCypher,

Seriously, you don't like the title of this thread so much that you will continue to post and whine and yell until it gets fixed? Is it hard for you to accept that you don't have absolute control over what other people do?

You would win more friends to your truth squad movement if you weren't so annoying.

Your links are informative and you seem to know what you talking about, but man, calm down. It doesn't matter if people don't agree with you, that doesn't count against you.

Seriously.

aluminum's picture

"I find it fascinating that you continue to focus on my tone, without saying a word to Miha"

Sometimes one's volume and behavior drowns out any valid points they may have had.

StoneCypher's picture

Frode: I did cut Miha some slask.

Miha: I don't care why you continue to be dishonest. You might want to look the word "paranoid" up; I have not expressed any fear, let alone any irrational fear.

Please stop taking credit for the work of my friends, no matter what reason you've chosen not to.

mattyu's picture

As StoneCypher registered on Typophile just to attack Miha, I've registered to defend him and to praise his work.

I started reading this thread a few days ago but I was disappointed to see the trolling that has overshadowed the fascinating discussion.

StoneCypher: Two words: ‘Messiah complex.’ You're not rectifying history, you're just singing “liar, liar, pants on fire.” That the title of a forum discussion bothers you so much is kind of pathetic. We see a lot of things we disagree with on the web. One just closes the website and moves on. Just quit while you’re... Never mind, just quit.

Keep up the good work, Miha. Any updates on where you're going with the name? I suggest the you take the egotistical route and call it "Miha" since your name is short. But come to think of it, maybe it should be a name with three letters to match the x-height?

qu1j0t3's picture

Wow John H/StoneCypher: member for 2 days and you're already an obnoxious, arrogant pain in the ass - pre-existing condition, or just a special for us? Please get a new hobby before Typophile cuts you down to size.

towolf's picture

Now I’m waiting for a sock puppet or two. Preferably the one with the broken finger.

Frode Bo Helland's picture

Guys, I think you should stop the ridiculing as well. Let this rest!

autacraft's picture

Hi again Miha,

Regards that link to an earlier post (referencing when the typeface might be ready?)...my browser sent me to a section which included:

"Oliver, can you add a license information that generated images are released under this license: CC by-nd 2.5 with an addition that all generated images will be changed once I finish my typeface. I may latter also change rather restrictive conditions for attribution to less restrictive ones."

Is that where it meant to lead me - I'm a bit unclear what you were trying to tell me :-(

Sorry for my lack of knowledge!

dontbugme's picture

And that, folks, concludes the definitive guide on proper forum trolling. Tune in next month for our series on spam bots. Thanks for coming, everyone!

miha's picture

I'm posting some more progress, this time uppercase in bold italic. Still the long way to go! I will have to add numbers and additional characters; then, I suspect, automatically setting the text will reveal spacing problems in both bold weights. In the end I will add suport for pretested color combinations.

It is still very rough around the edges :-) (not literally)

Nathan, I should be more specific. I can understand that you didn't want to read all the irrelevant information. Actually, I was refering to my comment that you quoted, meaning that type will be released under CC license – basically this means for free. (and Oliver already made a quick engine for setting text, although I prefer not to use it before the typeface is finished…) Also, I really don't know when it will be finished. I think it has been nine days since I started from nothing.

Matthew, thank you! I think I won't name it after myself. Did some fonts before [but none of them really finished] and they didn't have my name. I think I am going to chose a really unusual name.

Bendy's picture

Nice work Miha. I'm amazed at the way you've made the interletter space consistent between the glyphs, and that it still looks black on white.

What format is this font in? And would it work on different coloured backgrounds or inverted?

Keep up the good work ;)

miha's picture

Thanks, Ben! Yes, I was specially careful with spacing when I first started the italic. With bold italic I was just making glyphs, and this is not the only reason why there are going to be problems.
I think the text looks relatively light. The downside of fonts rendered with subpixel rendering is that they look lighter (not as black) as pure pixel rendered fonts.
Well … this "specimen" is the font format. A little flash app in developement takes this little lines which begin with red dot, copies the corresponding glyphs and sets the text (only for italic, tho, and still has some problems).
As for the colors: they will have to be changed by the application, since every color combination needs different colors. But not all colors will work equally well, even theoretically.

StoneCypher's picture

Please stop taking other people's credit, Miha. You have been provided ample evidence of prior extance.

Bendy's picture

Whether or not this is the first handmade subpixel font family or not, this is still a remarkable piece of work, cleverly executed.

StoneCypher's picture

Miha, please stop taking credit for other people's work now.

StoneCypher's picture

I'd really rather you clean this up yourself, Miha. You were apologetic until everyone decided to complain.

However, if you'd like me to go to the moderators, we can do it that way.

I really hope you'll choose to be honest on your own, instead of insisting on keeping a false claim in public just to be spiteful to the person making the request that you be honest.

You shouldn't need a reason or help from others to be honest.

nina's picture

And I think we all hope you'd shut up now. You have made your point. It's there for posterity to see. OK? Goodbye.
(Do we really need to repeat that ad nauseam too?!)

StoneCypher's picture

Altaira: Why do you feel it appropriate to tell me what you think I should do, but that I should not tell Miha what I think s/he should do?

The difference between Miha and I here is that whereas I've been gruff, I'm not taking credit for anyone else's work.

gingerbeardman's picture

miha, keep up the great work and well done with the youtube thing!

fransb's picture

Can you describe the format a bit better, in noob terms. The color of the line under the characters are the hex value of the chars, but I don't see any line under the capital characters. Neither do I understand the relation between the white/red/"black" pixels,

miha's picture

I know there is a nitpicking from my side, because difference between first such typeface versus type family (more weights) is a rather small, and maybe just unimportant … (I changed the title only once, to reflect this).

Because there were (are) very impolite posts not showing a type family – but million other things instead, I didn't want to change it. Ironically, if he said he was sure there was such type families before, but just can't find anything, I would change it as well. Even more ironically, I think the title such as "The name, a 3px x-height typeface" would be better.

Maybe it was a mistake not responding to his lies after I saw discussion is impossible. And now, I just can't change the title, because regular users of Typophile may think I am indeed dishonest … and after thousands of words and dozens of links which no regular user clicked on & studied them it may really seem so :-(
_

Matt, thanks!

Fran, I am noob myself (sorry if you are not!). I wanted to make the format as simple as possible for designers. And you are right about hex values, but you couldn't know that typeface is not finished in this aspect either. There are no lines under capitals because I haven't added them yet. Also, in the last posted file there should be no red dots in bold italic.
Relation between white/red/"black": all "black" dots under one glyph represent the width of that glyph, from left sidebearing to the right. But a part of the glyph can extends even more on the left or to the right, this is why there is sometimes white dot after the red (see f for example). A glyph ends with another red dot (which is used for next glyph). But what if glyph is the last in the line? There should be another red dot to "stop" it. (but if you look at my example you will notice there is no dot after z :))
The beauty of this is that you can move glyphs around in any way you want, and make it look exactly as you want (I made the curly border, for example). The downside is you can't use exactly red pixels elsewhere (and some other colors for additinal weights and feautures).

evank's picture

Glad to see you've been making so much progress, miha. Even if someone's built such a thing before, it's still impressive to see it come together from scratch :)

On a wider subject, may I suggest that everyone *stop feeding the troll*. Stop acknowledging his existence and he will eventually disappear in a puff of self-importance. Instead, he may even find a magazine to subscribe to.

aluminum's picture

I propose we just change the name of the thread to:

First handmade subpixel type family, ever*

*and 'ever' meaning nothing necessarily literal but more as a catchy headline as there may very well be documented examples of this being done before. But, of course, no one really cares too much about that. Well, except one particular forum troll. So, for his sake, we've added this long wordy disclaimer to the thread so that he may go back to his friend with the sore hand and let him know that all is right in the world once again.

jniemasik's picture

How about "Little Prints"?

ashley.mitchell's picture

Come on, everyone, let's all give grumpy ol' John Haugeland a hug and turn that frown, upside down!

Here's wishing you rainbows and puppy dogs, John! Mwah!

muji's picture

Sorry to divert from the actual typefaces Miha is trying to produce – the topic is not one I am familiar with but I'm finding it quite interesting. The 'John Haugeland' question is impossible to avoid. His 'educational' posts are well tempered and informative and add to the topic. The 'first' related posts are something else. As John keeps on berating people for not reading what he says I have been trying to follow through on his weblinks but so far I am struggling to see in them any physical examples that prove that the current claim 'First handmade subpixel type family, ever' is totally erroneous. My total ignorance of the subject matter is a hindrance but I have already come up against a few problems:

Wozniak for the honour first 'handmade subpixel typeface'? Or not?

John Haugeland claims:
"Here’s HRCG (High-Resolution Character Generator), which is Apple doing a handmade subpixel type family in 1976, US Patent 4079458."

Firefox warned me against accessing the website John supplied, so, from a different website http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4079458.pdf, I see the inventors for Patent 4079458 'High resolution character generator' are listed as: Rider, Ronald E. (Menlo Park, CA) and Lampson, Butler W. (Portola Valley, CA) with Assignee as Xerox Corporation. Where's Wozniak? Where's Apple?

In the patent I do not see any typefaces let alone type families and the patent seems to be concerned with 'character generation' which is an automatic process not a 'handmade' process.

Then on the Wikipedia page on subpixel rendering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub_pixel_rendering does not appear to tally with John's opinions. It currently reads:

Originally invented by IBM in 1988, subpixel rendering . . .

Subpixel Rendering and the Apple II:

It is sometimes claimed (e.g. by Steve Gibson) that the Apple II supported an early form of subpixel rendering in its high-resolution (280x192) graphics mode. However, the method Gibson describes can also be viewed as a limitation of the way the machine generates color, rather than as a technique intentionally exploited by programmers to increase resolution.. .

While the quote from Apple II inventor Steve Wozniak on Gibson's page seems to imply that Apple II graphics programmers routinely used subpixel rendering, it is difficult to make a case that many of them thought of what they were doing in such terms.

Plagiarism

John says

"Grow up. Plagiarists - that word means “someone who steals someone else’s credit”, not work - deserve a lot worse than a series of originally polite but increasingly disappointed comments giving concrete counter-examples."

The definition did not chime with what I would describe as a plagiarist so I looked up the definition of plagiarism in the Oxford English Dictionary. It said to 'take (the work or idea of someone else) and pretend it is one's own work'.
So John, I will refrain from telling you to "grow up", but you are plain and simply wrong in your definition of plagiarism. You have to steal the work first before you can steal credit for it. Miha did not steal Steve Wozniak's work, anyone else's work, nor pretend it was his own work. Yes, he claimed to be a 'first' but he did not steal someone else's work and pass it off as a 'first', he applied it to his own work. But I agree Miha's claim should be accurate and thus changed if proven false. Similarly you should retract your claim of plagiarism as it is based on your faulty definition and is not true.

Conflict resolution

Given my ignorance and the esoteric nature of the topic it would appear to me the accuracy of Miha's claim to 'First handmade subpixel type family, ever' would be simply resolved by John supplying not a multitude of ripostes and weblinks but a simple image (with provenance) that we can all see immediately proves his point. To do this, in my mind, it must satisfy all the following criteria in order to convince Miha his claim needs to be amended:

a subpixel font showing a family of weights, not just a single weight, which have not been generated automatically but where the subpixel composition of the different weights of characters was selected and refined by human not machine.

I hope Miha is happy that my wording matches his claim.

dontbugme's picture

I got linked to this from YouTube's blog, and I say JOB WELL DONE to Miha! To affect the change of a Top 10 internet site's Favicon is extremely impressive, indeed. More impressive than anything Mr. Troll claims to have done, without a doubt.

I am nearly crying with laughter after reading this comment by aluminium:
"I propose we just change the name of the thread to:
First handmade subpixel type family, ever*"!!! LMAO!! And to see it was truly changed. Troll begone!

Clearly StoneCypher doesn't play well with others, lacks even Kindergarten-level social skills and does have a Messiah complex as others have noted. Forum moderators, proceed with the ban hammer.

StoneCypher's picture

Firefox warned me against accessing the website John supplied, so, from a different website http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4079458.pdf, I see the inventors for Patent 4079458 ’High resolution character generator’ are listed as: Rider, Ronald E. (Menlo Park, CA) and Lampson, Butler W. (Portola Valley, CA) with Assignee as Xerox Corporation. Where’s Wozniak? Where’s Apple?

Apple and Xerox have a long standing relationship. HRCG is Apple's commercialization of Xerox' technology. It's relatively easy to find examples of output, or to get copies of the DOS Tool Kit ][ disk, which still has a copy of HRCG, for emulators. This is the relationship which later led Apple to commercialize Xerox' GUI technology as the Lisa, then later the Macintosh. Most of the technologies commonly ascribed to Apple's early wizardry actually came from the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center.

http://www.mrob.com/pub/xapple2/index.html

In the patent I do not see any typefaces let alone type families

Not particularly surprising. However, with cursory research, they're easily findable, for example at that page I just gave you. They're also all over a bunch of my other links. I'm sure you'll manage.

Then on the Wikipedia page on subpixel rendering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub_pixel_rendering does not appear to tally with John’s opinions.

http://sc.tri-bit.com/outgoing/NeverBelieveWikipediaTechnicalArticles.png

However, the method Gibson describes can also be viewed as a limitation of the way the machine generates color, rather than as a technique intentionally exploited by programmers to increase resolution

That's a little like saying that the method Ford describes can also be viewed as a limitation of the way engine blocks stably store gasoline, rather than as a technique intentionally exploited by engineers to derive motive force from explosions.

You know, in that it's completely wrong-headed and ignores the clearly stated intents of the programmers in question when explaining their system in public. And also, that it misses the significant increase in resolution as compared to the prior text system, which used how the monitor actually worked to produce letters that looked less good.

It would be best if you considered the quality of the sentiment before citing it as contrary evidence. Whoever wrote that is the reason Wikipedia is not taken seriously as a source.

The definition did not chime with what I would describe as a plagiarist so I looked up the definition of plagiarism in the Oxford English Dictionary. It said to ’take (the work or idea of someone else) and pretend it is one’s own work’.

Contrary to popular belief, the OED isn't actually a very good lexicon; they shovel anything they can half-explain sideways into the book, because size, rather than selectivity or quality, is the OED's selling point. A better dictionary of British English is the Collins; I personally prefer the American Heritage.

That said, yes, that's exactly what's being done here. To take the idea of someone else and pretend it is one's own work. I fail to see why that's difficult to associate.

Miha did not steal Steve Wozniak’s work

No, but the idea, yes. You're narrowing that definition too much, and in direct contrast to how I explicitly used it. The definition supports my usage explicitly, albeit parenthetically.

Which is silly, since their parenthetical is actually the primary, not the secondary, meaning of the word.

So John, I will refrain from telling you to “grow up”

Apparently you will not.

but you are plain and simply wrong in your definition of plagiarism.

Well, you've chosen a very poor source, for one, but frankly I don't see the definition you've cut and pasted disagreeing with me.

But I agree Miha’s claim should be accurate and thus changed if proven false.

Er. Are you taking the remarkable position that in that list containing ten websites at least ten years old which contain downloadable subpixel font families made by hand, that this falsification has not yet occurred?

I confess I'm not sure what to say to that.

simple image (with provenance) that we can all see immediately proves his point.

Er, I provided several. I even took the time to point out which ones had such screen shots.

However, if you cannot be bothered to click several links before telling me I haven't made my point, here's one of many such examples, which is in the monochrome editor, but otherwise contains all the information you need. This is a grid mapping; it reduces in width by half when displayed, but could not be done so in realtime due to the way Apple ][ character sets were loaded into video memory during the boot process for an application.

http://www.mrob.com/apple2/lin32-set.jpg

It only shows one of the weights at a time, but given the limitations of the machines of the late 1970s, and the fact that it's discussing the font name, character set and weight on screen, I hope you'll trust that screenshot in as far as to actually look this stuff up before questioning its already linked veracity again.

Frankly I'm not used to being asked to repeat easy research on grounds that the proof already given is too voluminous. It's quite frustrating, as is the exceptionally poor behavior of the people complaining about my behavior. A fine round of Tu Quoque for all.

I retain my observation that anyone who bothers to look into the matter even slightly will find pile after pile of evidence.

Miha: Please amend this blog title to be honest soon as you already promised twice, thanks.

StoneCypher's picture

DontBugMe: That would be primarily because I haven't claimed to have achieved anything here. That said, subpixelling an icon is tremendously simple work; subpixelling the YouTube icon is about a ten minute job. Give it a try yourself, using the rules I outlined above, the tutorial I wrote on how to do that in 2005, or the editor I half-wrote and posted in the links.

Or, you could use the subpixel icon editor I wrote for the Nintendo DS in 2006, which runs natively on the embedded hardware and gives you the use of the pen and touchscreen.

Seriously, it's really easy to subpixel an icon; you should try it, as it's an interesting learning experience. Would you like for me to subpixel your favicon, to make the point? It would need to be relatively monochromatic outside the green range.

Which is not to suggest that those accomplishments I just listed, which are germane, are in any way impressive; writing embedded software for a closed videogame platform isn't that big a deal.

But I do believe it compares favorably with a subpixel icon.

Incidentally, did you notice that the favicon for my site is subpixel also, and has a file date of 2006? I didn't bring it up because it's not actually that much to crow about, but maybe it'll help you with that trying to make comparisons thing of yours. I didn't want to compare myself to Miha, but you've sort of forced my hand. It's unfortunate.

Also, you might want to look up the several subpixel fonts I released several years ago; they were much more work than the favicon. I suspect Miha will say the same thing; fonts are way, way harder than a single tiny geometrically aligned icon.

StoneCypher's picture

chris_n: In the future, please use the canonical URL, in case I some year bother to update my picture. That URL is

http://fullof.bs/outgoing/ILookTehDumm.jpg

Thanks kindly.

Zara Evens's picture

StoneCypher,

You've made your point, and I understand your argument. However, you are now doing nothing but turning this thread into rubbish by harassing people and throwing a temper tantrum, and we are getting complaints about your behavior. By all means, continue to discuss this in a civil manner as you clearly have a lot of knowledge to share and we welcome that, but tone down the insults.

Chill out - we won't tolerate bullying behavior, so I recommend you take it offline.

Typophile

StoneCypher's picture

Zara: The fact remains that things are still dishonest here. I am at this point only replying to people like you and repeating my request calmly and politely.

Disengage the "stop insulting people" rhetoric. It's been days since I've said anything remotely insulting, and it's disinteresting on grounds that you ignore the people here actually participating in serious insults, posting of personal information and threats.

I respect that you are staff, but it is inappropriate for you to apply rules to just one person, when so many people here are behaving so much more seriously.

Please apply your rules to everyone equally, if at all. Thank you. Your reaction in the future will make clear whether Typophile is in any way bothered by well documented fictions.

In the meantime, you have false claims on your site. Will you please step in soon? The nature of this post is entirely inappropriate.

John Haugeland is http://fullof.bs/

StoneCypher's picture

Incidentally, to everyone telling me I've made my point, as long as the false claims are retained, I clearly have not; you might consider discussing this with me in a different fashion, as that viewpoint will not sway me.

I'm not here to have my say. I'm here to right a wrong. The wrong is not righted, so I will continue to calmly, politely ask for this site's staff to correct a false claim.

This is not as unreasonable as this crowd continues to paint it as being.

Zara Evens's picture

John, thanks for your kind words, and for you e-mails. I expect I will see more of those in the future.

In the mean time, I suggest everyone simply ignore this guy, he is harmless and he is clearly on a mission for attention. If in fact his claims have any legal consequences (copyright, intellectual property, etc), then please present legitimate information clearly so we can take action, if necessary.

Joe Pemberton's picture

Aluminum: ROTFLWCMEO

(Ahem, that's rolling on the floor laughing while crying my eyes out.)

Joe Pemberton's picture

There, I did what I could. Enjoy.

Bloodtype's picture

Stoney babes, are you sure you're not just a complete penis?

Joe Pemberton's picture

@Bloodtype. Dude. Uncalled for. Seriously.

StoneCypher's picture

@JoePemberton: I'm really not worried about what people say to me; I'm a harsh man and I would be a hypocrite to complain about what others say to or about me if I didn't allow others to be harsh towards me, and the tone has been thoroughly set here by the significantly more severe things other people have said. Since Zara failed to say anything to the various highly abusive regulars here, thereby implicitly condoning this behavior here, I would contend that Bloodtype is just following the social norm at this site. (Besides, Bloodtype is right; I am a penis.)

Actually I find it vaguely amusing, though I admit I wish they'd be a bit less repetitive. The use of my photo by chris_n made me lol hard, as did DontBugMe's suggestion that I think I'm jesus; I wish other people would put in that level of effort to be novel. It'd make the rahr worth reading.

All I want is for this well explained as false claim to come down. I don't see what is so difficult here: this isn't the first handmade subpixel type family ever - not even close - and Miha should not be attempting to gather notoriety for something he didn't do.

And then I'll happily disappear like so much smoke in the wind, because it's obvious that despite the answers and information I've brought, I'm not wanted here. That's fine.

But I do want to see this false claim come down. It's a simple matter of integrity.

I genuinely don't understand why the editing of a false claim title seems like something other than the obviously right thing to do here.

Syndicate content Syndicate content