Screen Shots of your UI...

[zork]

Pixel fonts look awesome on screenshots. Thats the same fake as clean-shots. They do nothing you could show a blank paper aswell. If your UI works in raid+combat or group+combat you are set.

[SacUI]

Leitka?

..i think i speak for the rest of us, when i say:

Are you gonna share that awesome UI, or what!?!

[Leitka]

Originally Posted by zork Pixel fonts look awesome on screenshots. Thats the same fake as clean-shots. They do nothing you should show a blank paper aswell. If your UI works in raid+combat or group+combat you are set.

Again, it comes down to the specific font, and the usage. A general "pixel fonts do nothing" is as useful as "all non-pixel fonts are great". It's clearly not true in either case.

What works and doesn't work in a setting (which, of course, is not *always* going to be raid+combat or group+combat, as there are quite a number of "solo" players) comes down to the users preferences and needs, not abstract statements. Cohesion with the aesthetic of the UI *and* with the users needs is what is needed.

I would argue that a pixelated UI, with pixel fonts, that is consisely organized and appropriately uses strong points of focus (middle of the screen, or even thirds organization, depending on application) and emphasis on color and form is easier to understand in a snap situation than a dimly colored UI of a less cohesive organization, with the most readable font you can find. Of course, this is different for everyone.

Originally Posted by SacUI Leitka? ..i think i speak for the rest of us, when i say: Are you gonna share that awesome UI, or what!?!

Eventually. Part of why I swapped back over to LitePanels, I'm trying to minimize the memory usage back down to what the previous version had, still have some other work to do towards that.
Then again, with it being so near to Cata at this point, it may just be better off to wait until all of the chaos is over :P

[SacUI]

Originally Posted by Leitka Eventually. Part of why I swapped back over to LitePanels, I'm trying to minimize the memory usage back down to what the previous version had, still have some other work to do towards that. Then again, with it being so near to Cata at this point, it may just be better off to wait until all of the chaos is over :P

Really nice work you've done so far mate. It's simply just beatutiful.

Just upload the damn thing, now. Update it after Cata. .

[haylie]

Keep in mind that some pixel fonts are bigger and/or easier to read than others. Case in point:

http://pixelfonts.style-force.net/

Most of the fonts on that page don't even look like pixel fonts until someone tells you they are. Not every pixel font is square and obnoxiously small.

Also, Leitka, I just can't agree with you on the fact that pixel fonts can be easier to read, even when you're accustomed to them. A bigger font will *always* be more readable than a smaller font, pixel or not. That's the same reason you're using a normal font on your chat window: it's easier to read.

[Leitka]

Originally Posted by haylie Also, Leitka, I just can't agree with you on the fact that pixel fonts can be easier to read, even when you're accustomed to them. A bigger font will *always* be more readable than a smaller font, pixel or not. That's the same reason you're using a normal font on your chat window: it's easier to read.

I think I could easily point out a pixel font on the page you linked that is more readable than, say, Bazooka, but that would just be obnoxious. :P

The actual reason pixel fonts tend to be a bad idea on a chat isn't because they're inherently hard to read, it's because there is less differentiation between characters. In short-strings, this isn't a problem. In large walls of text, this is a huge problem. Again, though, part of my point is the fact that pixel fonts are the only way *to* achieve small fonts in some cases. And aesthetically, small fonts can be much more appealing. Even the most off-the-wall Pixel Font is going to be more legible at size 8 than the average sans-serif font due so the anti-aliased characters.

In other words, yes, larger fonts are always easier to read. They're also not always needed or appropriate if your goal is towards a certain aesthetic. I would still argue that if configured properly you are given MUCH more leeway in being creative with your text strings, if you allow yourself alternate methods of communicating those needs; i.e. easy to read bars, and bright, recognizable coloration to highlight points. There's a reason pixel fonts almost always accompany very simplistic textures and bright colors/high contrast between colored segments and grey segments.

[haylie]

Originally Posted by Leitka I think I could easily point out a pixel font on the page you linked that is more readable than, say, Bazooka, but that would just be obnoxious. :P

The actual reason pixel fonts tend to be a bad idea on a chat isn't because they're inherently hard to read, it's because there is less differentiation between characters. In short-strings, this isn't a problem. In large walls of text, this is a huge problem.

Which makes your font... wait for it... hard to read.

[Leitka]

Originally Posted by haylie Which makes your font... wait for it... hard to read.

...in large strings. This is actually due to letter kerning and vertical spacing, not so much the fonts legibility itself. In particular, the font I use (which I freely admit is difficult to read at a glance) has no actual spacing between letters, only between words. This isn't a problem when you're reading a few numbers, or a single word, but when you put words into sentences, it becomes a problem.

Again, a lot of it comes down to size. You're not going to find a non-pixel font that is readable at size 8.

[Dawn]

Originally Posted by Leitka Again, a lot of it comes down to size. You're not going to find a non-pixel font that is readable at size 8.

The font in the picture attached is readable @size 8. Even though I'm using a thin outline, which makes it a little blurry at this size. The big advantage of pixel fonts is the outline - monochrome outline is just perfect at such small sizes and doesn't work well with non pixel fonts.

Btw, I would prefer size 10 pixel fonts over size 8 pixel fonts any day.

Anyway the advantage of the font I use is that it looks awesome at any size. You can easily adjust the size a little without losing quality. While pixel fonts are restricting in that you have to use a multiplier in size of their base size 10 is ok, but no one needs 20 ...

€: attached picture of size 9 and 10

[sakurakira]

Originally Posted by Leitka You're not going to find a non-pixel font that is readable at size 8.

Actually, one of the reasons I leave Friz Quadrata as the default UI font is because it looks good at small sizes. The reason I stay with Friz is because I use the default UFs and when I've tried other fonts (like the popular Expressway Free), it looks like garbage at the smaller size.

[Leitka]

At those sizes, though, what actually distinguishes this font from a pixel font? Very little. At that size, it actually looks like an improperly sized pixel font, which kind of plays into what I've been saying. It has the same strengths and weaknesses as a pixel font of the same size. I would actually say that a pixelated version of that font would look *much* better at that size. When you're getting to sizes where the width of a letters leg is a single pixel wide, any non-pixel font is going to suffer from horrendous blurring due to the AA of the font, shadow or not.

I certainly wouldn't call that easy to read at both sizes, though. Non-pixel fonts do still suffer slightly at certain sizes, and that one definitely is in the size 9 shot.

As for who would want a size 8 font? Well, it depends on the font in question. Some fonts are larger as size 8 than others, there's little standard there unfortunately.

There seems to be a pretty bad misunderstanding on this forum as to what is and what isn't a pixel font. A pixel font, by definition, is designed to look best at small sizes. An anti-aliased font, by definition, will not look right at these sizes. A pixel font will be crisply defined, a non-pixel font will bleed. If it's not bleeding at these sizes then that font is aesthetically the same as a pixel font at that particular size.
Pixel fonts = fonts designed for small-size usage. Pixel fonts are not always boxy letters, as the link Haylie posted clearly demonstrates.





Sakura: While I'm actually a fan of that font too, thats still technically a bit larger than I'm talking about. :P
As an example of the smaller sizes I'm referring to, the old version of my UFs;

The concept of the nested castbar like this with the text *inside* the frame (whole castbar idea inspired by Ish a while ago :P) would be very unattractive with a normal serif font, as its simply impossible to make one small enough to be readable and not hog space in this application.

[Wimpface]

Right, I've googled and for some reason I can't find this AddOn that I know several people used to use before I quit, and I think it's still used though I'm not sure.
It may be offtopic, but where the flying flux can I find the addon "Filger"? I've googled for it, but it's nowhere.

To stay on topic, my UI has not changed a lot.
25man:


10man:


Considering making bars on DBM the same height as the icons for more symmetry. Thoughts/ideas?

[Leitka]

Originally Posted by Wimpface Right, I've googled and for some reason I can't find this AddOn that I know several people used to use before I quit, and I think it's still used though I'm not sure. It may be offtopic, but where the flying flux can I find the addon "Filger"? I've googled for it, but it's nowhere.

http://wow.shantalya.de/ is the authors site, hope your German is good. :P

[Wimpface]

Originally Posted by Leitka http://wow.shantalya.de/ is the authors site, hope your German is good. :P

Danke Leitka!
My german is terrible, and that's about what I can say!

I'll dig into this. (:<

[sakurakira]

Originally Posted by Wimpface Right, I've googled and for some reason I can't find this AddOn that I know several people used to use before I quit, and I think it's still used though I'm not sure. It may be offtopic, but where the flying flux can I find the addon "Filger"? I've googled for it, but it's nowhere.

http://www.wowinterface.com/download...2-sFilger.html


Does anyone know what minimap addon Haleth and Game use? I asked a couple pages back, but no one responded >.<.

[Leitka]

Originally Posted by sakurakira Does anyone know what minimap addon Haleth and Game use? I asked a couple pages back, but no one responded >.<.

Game is using nMinimap according to the Aftermathh UI page.

[Dawn]

@Leitka
When you are talking about the difference of pixel and non pixel fonts, you have to keep in mind how they are created. Because that is the only difference which in turn can lead to the differences in usage and display. I say can, because you actually can create a non pixel font that will still be readable at small sizes.

You keep insisting that you need a font to work @size8, which is totally up to your personal preference. I for one can't live with something smaller than 10 pixel, especially not if using an UIScale. Not because my eyes are that bad, but it just looks way to tiny to be pleasant for me. Which, of course, might be just personal preference on my side.

However my point is, the major disadvantage of pixel fonts still applies if you want to use the same font all over the place, because you run into issues with it's size. Honestly, who can read a moving (like SCT, a lot of nameplates...) 8 pixel sized pixel font at an UIScale of ~0.71 in combat? Sure it's somehow possible but that needs a lot more attention than something that is clearly readable at a glance, like the same font @12-14pixel. That's where pixel fonts fail.

Putting all that information in such a tiny space and then HAVING to use an even more tiny font to justify this design is not my cup of tea.

[Leitka]

Originally Posted by Dawn @Leitka When you are talking about the difference of pixel and non pixel fonts, you have to keep in mind how they are created. Because that is the only difference which in turn can lead to the differences in usage and display. I say can, because you actually can create a non pixel font that will still be readable at small sizes.

That's why I'm referring to a functional and aesthetic difference, not the formal difference of being designed with a pixelated appearance in mind. As I said, the font you showed would look much better as a pixel font at that size. It's actually not easily read at all, though you may be used to it. There's significant bleeding of letters into other letters, notable on the V's and any letter with a diagonal really. Had you not stated otherwise, I would assume that font to be an inappropriately sized pixel font, which is not exactly a good aesthetic to aim for.

You keep insisting that you need a font to work @size8, which is totally up to your personal preference. I for one can't live with something smaller than 10 pixel, especially not if using an UIScale. Not because my eyes are that bad, but it just looks way to tiny to be pleasant for me. Which, of course, might be just personal preference on my side.

Again, just saying "size 8" or "size 10" can be kind of misleading. Some fonts are not sized appropriately, and a size 8 font is the same size as a standard size 10 font. A lot of pixel fonts are actually nearly unusable because of this, since it affects the vertical spacing of the font negatively. One of the fonts on the page posted earlier suffers from that problem, though I'd have to check to see which since I can't remember off of the top of my head.
And yeah, factioning in UI scale, the font size becomes an even more arbitrary number. My "size 8" fonts are actually size 9, for example. :P

However my point is, the major disadvantage of pixel fonts still applies if you want to use the same font all over the place, because you run into issues with it's size. Honestly, who can read a moving (like SCT, a lot of nameplates...) 8 pixel sized pixel font at an UIScale of ~0.71 in combat? Sure it's somehow possible but that needs a lot more attention than something that is clearly readable at a glance, like the same font @12-14pixel. That's where pixel fonts fail.

Absolutely. That's why I said early on in the conversation that there are places where theyre appropriate and places where they are not. If you go back a few pages, you'll actually notice my omniCC and scrolling text happen to be a regular serif font, the same as my chat. Pixel fonts are uses on the UF texts and damage/threat meters primarily, both of which are brightly colored elements which goes in line with the little guideline I gave on using them effectively. Aside from the castbar, theres little information you actually *need* in any of that text. Using pixel fonts and regular fonts together appropriately is always stronger than using either alone, it allows more options for emphasis of importance.

Putting all that information in such a tiny space and then HAVING to use an even more tiny font to justify this design is not my cup of tea.

Absolutely. It comes down to personal preference. In my case, the setup I've built over a while is most optimal to me. I'm able to quickly get any information on anything needed for my raiding role, and the cast borders are acceptably sized for a non-casting class.

[Seerah]

*ahem*

If you guys insist on debating about fonts, there are plenty of other more appropriate places for the discussion.

Carry on with the UI screenshots.

[Dawn]

When I'm talking about size, I'm always referring to the "FontSize" that is set via code. This is what is set in stone, I know that fonts can look differently sized on the same size.

I know that the font I posted in my example looks blurry @8, but that's entirely due to Thin Outline at this size. The point was that it's a non pixel font that even though the outline doesn't match, still looks ok on that size... just take a look at the picture without an outline.

Btw, I applied a Monochrome Outline, just for the fun of it and it looks like a pixel font @10 pixel (behaves like a pixel font actually), not @8 pixel though.


As a side note, in case a non pixel font looks ok @size 8, but not with Thin Outline, you can still make it stand out with SetShadowColor and a small offset like 1,-1.


@Seerah there are screenshots attached in every of my posts!

*cough* I got it ...