Is there a fix to prevent text input in paint from being very aliased/blurry?












2















Basically, I press the "A" shaped button in paint to type text, it looks clear.



I press outside the box, and the text becomes more blurry/pixelated.



Is there a way to resolve this while not having to replace MS Paint with another program?



Thanks!










share|improve this question



























    2















    Basically, I press the "A" shaped button in paint to type text, it looks clear.



    I press outside the box, and the text becomes more blurry/pixelated.



    Is there a way to resolve this while not having to replace MS Paint with another program?



    Thanks!










    share|improve this question

























      2












      2








      2








      Basically, I press the "A" shaped button in paint to type text, it looks clear.



      I press outside the box, and the text becomes more blurry/pixelated.



      Is there a way to resolve this while not having to replace MS Paint with another program?



      Thanks!










      share|improve this question














      Basically, I press the "A" shaped button in paint to type text, it looks clear.



      I press outside the box, and the text becomes more blurry/pixelated.



      Is there a way to resolve this while not having to replace MS Paint with another program?



      Thanks!







      windows microsoft-paint






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Sep 2 '16 at 23:35









      Buffer Over ReadBuffer Over Read

      12318




      12318






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          Campbell Wray was close.



          The only way you would see that effect in Paint, is if you were zoomed in > 1:1. If you click on the "View" tab and then click on "100%", then typed text will appear exactly while typing, as when done typing...Cleartype anti-aliasing and all. If you zoom in, say by clicking "Zoom in" three times, you'll clearly see the rainbow-colored clear-type anti-aliasing. (If you have that enabled as it is by default since Vista. Otherwise you'll just see bigger jaggies.)



          While zoomed in that far (400% I think), if you try adding text now, it will look clear and sharp while typing. Then when done, all jaggy and alias-ey and clear-type-ey.



          It's the fundamental concept of a bitmap or raster image. When you zoom in to 200%, every pixel in the image will be represented by four actual screen pixels (in a 2x bigger square). 400% = 16x more screen pixels per bitmap pixel, for a 4x bigger square. And so on. Paint just isn't sophisticated enough to render the text entry at the same zoomed-in "effective" resolution you are seeing once the text is rasterized to actual pixels (that you are then seeing zoomed in). So, it renders the text-entry at an exaggerated on-screen point size, to mathematically aproximate the size it will appear once rasterized to pixels. Photoshop does actually render text entry at >1:1 zooms, exactly as it will appear once done and rasterized. That's because Photoshop has it's own antialiasing engine that is sophisticated enough to take zoom into account, and simulate the output during entry.



          I actually think it's pretty interesting that Paint preserves Cleartype anti-aliasing. I didn't think that information was easily available to programs, it was more of a final rendering system buffer that applications can't access. So, either that theory is wrong, or there is some API to run the same font -> anti-aliasing -> bitmap for that very kind of purpose (that is ignorant of "zoom"), or Paint is just faking Cleartype rendering. (Which isn't far-fetched. Adobe Photoshop has a fake Cleartype antialiasing method, among it's other, arguably better internal methods. I can't remember what they call it - it's not "Cleartype" - and it's not identical, but close. Photoshop is cross-platform though, so that's not proof of anything really. And since Paint apparently isn't faking Cleartype rendering while taking zoom into account, it seems unlikely that Paint is faking Cleartype at all. It's probably just rasterizing it exactly how Windows gives it to it, however that happens.)



          If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:




          • Make your text (and/or entire bitmap) twice the size you need in each direction (4 times the number of pixels).

          • Create your text and any other artwork.

          • Choose the "Resize" function, reduce both direction by 50%.


          Paint uses an ugly interpolation method, but the result for text - in the context of artowrk at least - is arguably better, because it reduces the effects of Microsoft's over-strong Cleartype font hinting. The result is somewhere in-between the full hinting you started with, and the no hinting of bind pixel resampling. Too much smaller than 50% though, and the effects of bad resampling start to dominate, and things get blurry where they shouldn't.)



          The problem with Cleartype is that it doesn't preserve the font's intended shapes. Microsoft prefers clear text on screen. So they use strong "hinting" to essentially hammer every horizontal or vertical part of each character, into the actual screen pixel grid - so that it is sharper to read. And it is sharper to read, but the tradeoff is that fonts look different than designed. Some remarkably so. (Others less so, such as the ones Microsoft designed specifically for on-screen Cleartype, such as Calibri.)



          Mac OS on the other hand, prefers font fidelity, and uses very little to no hinting. As a result, the fonts have lovelier shapes, but to some people are insultingly blurry. (Except on "Retina" displays.) It's highly personal - some are literally offended by it, I like it - and am not a fan of Cleartype.



          To me, Ubuntu takes the prize. You can adjust all the big things about font rendering:




          • Antialising type (grayscale, or "subpixel", and different RGB ordering for subpixel rendering on different LCD panel pixel arrangements)

          • Hinting type (basically none similar to Mac OS, vertical only [my favorite], and "full" [aka Microsoft hammer it all to the pixel grid]).






          share|improve this answer


























          • "If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:" I don't understand this workaround, could you explain it more clearly?

            – Buffer Over Read
            Sep 3 '16 at 16:26








          • 1





            OK, let's say you just want a jpeg image of the sentence, "Eat more!" Let's say you want the font to be 20 pt. and not look so "Cleartyp-ey": 1) Select the text tool. 2) Select the font you want, and make it 40 pt. [Not 20 pt.] 3) Type the text you want ["Eat more!"]. 4) Then click the mouse somewhere else, to rasterize the text. 5) Resize the image with the "Resize" button. Enter 50% for both width and height. Now you'll have 20 pt. text that is still be anti-aliased, just not so "Cleartype-ey" as if you had entered it in 20 pt. to begin with.

            – bubbles
            Sep 3 '16 at 21:48





















          1














          It's likely related to the image being too small.



          When you see the preview text it is a vector and looks very smooth, however when you click off the text to finalise it Paint rasterises the text and it becomes pixelated.



          Now I don't have Paint in front of me but if it's like other image editors you should be able to change the image resolution somewhere, this will mean that there are more pixels for the text and it should look clearer.






          share|improve this answer































            0














            open another paint session. Go to "properties". Select Black and White. Now type whatever word and all the pixels generated will be black. Then make sure it's at 100% zoom, then you can use Snipping Tool to copy it and paste it into the other Paint session.






            share|improve this answer























              Your Answer








              StackExchange.ready(function() {
              var channelOptions = {
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "3"
              };
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
              createEditor();
              });
              }
              else {
              createEditor();
              }
              });

              function createEditor() {
              StackExchange.prepareEditor({
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: true,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: 10,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader: {
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              },
              onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              });


              }
              });














              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1120465%2fis-there-a-fix-to-prevent-text-input-in-paint-from-being-very-aliased-blurry%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              2














              Campbell Wray was close.



              The only way you would see that effect in Paint, is if you were zoomed in > 1:1. If you click on the "View" tab and then click on "100%", then typed text will appear exactly while typing, as when done typing...Cleartype anti-aliasing and all. If you zoom in, say by clicking "Zoom in" three times, you'll clearly see the rainbow-colored clear-type anti-aliasing. (If you have that enabled as it is by default since Vista. Otherwise you'll just see bigger jaggies.)



              While zoomed in that far (400% I think), if you try adding text now, it will look clear and sharp while typing. Then when done, all jaggy and alias-ey and clear-type-ey.



              It's the fundamental concept of a bitmap or raster image. When you zoom in to 200%, every pixel in the image will be represented by four actual screen pixels (in a 2x bigger square). 400% = 16x more screen pixels per bitmap pixel, for a 4x bigger square. And so on. Paint just isn't sophisticated enough to render the text entry at the same zoomed-in "effective" resolution you are seeing once the text is rasterized to actual pixels (that you are then seeing zoomed in). So, it renders the text-entry at an exaggerated on-screen point size, to mathematically aproximate the size it will appear once rasterized to pixels. Photoshop does actually render text entry at >1:1 zooms, exactly as it will appear once done and rasterized. That's because Photoshop has it's own antialiasing engine that is sophisticated enough to take zoom into account, and simulate the output during entry.



              I actually think it's pretty interesting that Paint preserves Cleartype anti-aliasing. I didn't think that information was easily available to programs, it was more of a final rendering system buffer that applications can't access. So, either that theory is wrong, or there is some API to run the same font -> anti-aliasing -> bitmap for that very kind of purpose (that is ignorant of "zoom"), or Paint is just faking Cleartype rendering. (Which isn't far-fetched. Adobe Photoshop has a fake Cleartype antialiasing method, among it's other, arguably better internal methods. I can't remember what they call it - it's not "Cleartype" - and it's not identical, but close. Photoshop is cross-platform though, so that's not proof of anything really. And since Paint apparently isn't faking Cleartype rendering while taking zoom into account, it seems unlikely that Paint is faking Cleartype at all. It's probably just rasterizing it exactly how Windows gives it to it, however that happens.)



              If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:




              • Make your text (and/or entire bitmap) twice the size you need in each direction (4 times the number of pixels).

              • Create your text and any other artwork.

              • Choose the "Resize" function, reduce both direction by 50%.


              Paint uses an ugly interpolation method, but the result for text - in the context of artowrk at least - is arguably better, because it reduces the effects of Microsoft's over-strong Cleartype font hinting. The result is somewhere in-between the full hinting you started with, and the no hinting of bind pixel resampling. Too much smaller than 50% though, and the effects of bad resampling start to dominate, and things get blurry where they shouldn't.)



              The problem with Cleartype is that it doesn't preserve the font's intended shapes. Microsoft prefers clear text on screen. So they use strong "hinting" to essentially hammer every horizontal or vertical part of each character, into the actual screen pixel grid - so that it is sharper to read. And it is sharper to read, but the tradeoff is that fonts look different than designed. Some remarkably so. (Others less so, such as the ones Microsoft designed specifically for on-screen Cleartype, such as Calibri.)



              Mac OS on the other hand, prefers font fidelity, and uses very little to no hinting. As a result, the fonts have lovelier shapes, but to some people are insultingly blurry. (Except on "Retina" displays.) It's highly personal - some are literally offended by it, I like it - and am not a fan of Cleartype.



              To me, Ubuntu takes the prize. You can adjust all the big things about font rendering:




              • Antialising type (grayscale, or "subpixel", and different RGB ordering for subpixel rendering on different LCD panel pixel arrangements)

              • Hinting type (basically none similar to Mac OS, vertical only [my favorite], and "full" [aka Microsoft hammer it all to the pixel grid]).






              share|improve this answer


























              • "If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:" I don't understand this workaround, could you explain it more clearly?

                – Buffer Over Read
                Sep 3 '16 at 16:26








              • 1





                OK, let's say you just want a jpeg image of the sentence, "Eat more!" Let's say you want the font to be 20 pt. and not look so "Cleartyp-ey": 1) Select the text tool. 2) Select the font you want, and make it 40 pt. [Not 20 pt.] 3) Type the text you want ["Eat more!"]. 4) Then click the mouse somewhere else, to rasterize the text. 5) Resize the image with the "Resize" button. Enter 50% for both width and height. Now you'll have 20 pt. text that is still be anti-aliased, just not so "Cleartype-ey" as if you had entered it in 20 pt. to begin with.

                – bubbles
                Sep 3 '16 at 21:48


















              2














              Campbell Wray was close.



              The only way you would see that effect in Paint, is if you were zoomed in > 1:1. If you click on the "View" tab and then click on "100%", then typed text will appear exactly while typing, as when done typing...Cleartype anti-aliasing and all. If you zoom in, say by clicking "Zoom in" three times, you'll clearly see the rainbow-colored clear-type anti-aliasing. (If you have that enabled as it is by default since Vista. Otherwise you'll just see bigger jaggies.)



              While zoomed in that far (400% I think), if you try adding text now, it will look clear and sharp while typing. Then when done, all jaggy and alias-ey and clear-type-ey.



              It's the fundamental concept of a bitmap or raster image. When you zoom in to 200%, every pixel in the image will be represented by four actual screen pixels (in a 2x bigger square). 400% = 16x more screen pixels per bitmap pixel, for a 4x bigger square. And so on. Paint just isn't sophisticated enough to render the text entry at the same zoomed-in "effective" resolution you are seeing once the text is rasterized to actual pixels (that you are then seeing zoomed in). So, it renders the text-entry at an exaggerated on-screen point size, to mathematically aproximate the size it will appear once rasterized to pixels. Photoshop does actually render text entry at >1:1 zooms, exactly as it will appear once done and rasterized. That's because Photoshop has it's own antialiasing engine that is sophisticated enough to take zoom into account, and simulate the output during entry.



              I actually think it's pretty interesting that Paint preserves Cleartype anti-aliasing. I didn't think that information was easily available to programs, it was more of a final rendering system buffer that applications can't access. So, either that theory is wrong, or there is some API to run the same font -> anti-aliasing -> bitmap for that very kind of purpose (that is ignorant of "zoom"), or Paint is just faking Cleartype rendering. (Which isn't far-fetched. Adobe Photoshop has a fake Cleartype antialiasing method, among it's other, arguably better internal methods. I can't remember what they call it - it's not "Cleartype" - and it's not identical, but close. Photoshop is cross-platform though, so that's not proof of anything really. And since Paint apparently isn't faking Cleartype rendering while taking zoom into account, it seems unlikely that Paint is faking Cleartype at all. It's probably just rasterizing it exactly how Windows gives it to it, however that happens.)



              If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:




              • Make your text (and/or entire bitmap) twice the size you need in each direction (4 times the number of pixels).

              • Create your text and any other artwork.

              • Choose the "Resize" function, reduce both direction by 50%.


              Paint uses an ugly interpolation method, but the result for text - in the context of artowrk at least - is arguably better, because it reduces the effects of Microsoft's over-strong Cleartype font hinting. The result is somewhere in-between the full hinting you started with, and the no hinting of bind pixel resampling. Too much smaller than 50% though, and the effects of bad resampling start to dominate, and things get blurry where they shouldn't.)



              The problem with Cleartype is that it doesn't preserve the font's intended shapes. Microsoft prefers clear text on screen. So they use strong "hinting" to essentially hammer every horizontal or vertical part of each character, into the actual screen pixel grid - so that it is sharper to read. And it is sharper to read, but the tradeoff is that fonts look different than designed. Some remarkably so. (Others less so, such as the ones Microsoft designed specifically for on-screen Cleartype, such as Calibri.)



              Mac OS on the other hand, prefers font fidelity, and uses very little to no hinting. As a result, the fonts have lovelier shapes, but to some people are insultingly blurry. (Except on "Retina" displays.) It's highly personal - some are literally offended by it, I like it - and am not a fan of Cleartype.



              To me, Ubuntu takes the prize. You can adjust all the big things about font rendering:




              • Antialising type (grayscale, or "subpixel", and different RGB ordering for subpixel rendering on different LCD panel pixel arrangements)

              • Hinting type (basically none similar to Mac OS, vertical only [my favorite], and "full" [aka Microsoft hammer it all to the pixel grid]).






              share|improve this answer


























              • "If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:" I don't understand this workaround, could you explain it more clearly?

                – Buffer Over Read
                Sep 3 '16 at 16:26








              • 1





                OK, let's say you just want a jpeg image of the sentence, "Eat more!" Let's say you want the font to be 20 pt. and not look so "Cleartyp-ey": 1) Select the text tool. 2) Select the font you want, and make it 40 pt. [Not 20 pt.] 3) Type the text you want ["Eat more!"]. 4) Then click the mouse somewhere else, to rasterize the text. 5) Resize the image with the "Resize" button. Enter 50% for both width and height. Now you'll have 20 pt. text that is still be anti-aliased, just not so "Cleartype-ey" as if you had entered it in 20 pt. to begin with.

                – bubbles
                Sep 3 '16 at 21:48
















              2












              2








              2







              Campbell Wray was close.



              The only way you would see that effect in Paint, is if you were zoomed in > 1:1. If you click on the "View" tab and then click on "100%", then typed text will appear exactly while typing, as when done typing...Cleartype anti-aliasing and all. If you zoom in, say by clicking "Zoom in" three times, you'll clearly see the rainbow-colored clear-type anti-aliasing. (If you have that enabled as it is by default since Vista. Otherwise you'll just see bigger jaggies.)



              While zoomed in that far (400% I think), if you try adding text now, it will look clear and sharp while typing. Then when done, all jaggy and alias-ey and clear-type-ey.



              It's the fundamental concept of a bitmap or raster image. When you zoom in to 200%, every pixel in the image will be represented by four actual screen pixels (in a 2x bigger square). 400% = 16x more screen pixels per bitmap pixel, for a 4x bigger square. And so on. Paint just isn't sophisticated enough to render the text entry at the same zoomed-in "effective" resolution you are seeing once the text is rasterized to actual pixels (that you are then seeing zoomed in). So, it renders the text-entry at an exaggerated on-screen point size, to mathematically aproximate the size it will appear once rasterized to pixels. Photoshop does actually render text entry at >1:1 zooms, exactly as it will appear once done and rasterized. That's because Photoshop has it's own antialiasing engine that is sophisticated enough to take zoom into account, and simulate the output during entry.



              I actually think it's pretty interesting that Paint preserves Cleartype anti-aliasing. I didn't think that information was easily available to programs, it was more of a final rendering system buffer that applications can't access. So, either that theory is wrong, or there is some API to run the same font -> anti-aliasing -> bitmap for that very kind of purpose (that is ignorant of "zoom"), or Paint is just faking Cleartype rendering. (Which isn't far-fetched. Adobe Photoshop has a fake Cleartype antialiasing method, among it's other, arguably better internal methods. I can't remember what they call it - it's not "Cleartype" - and it's not identical, but close. Photoshop is cross-platform though, so that's not proof of anything really. And since Paint apparently isn't faking Cleartype rendering while taking zoom into account, it seems unlikely that Paint is faking Cleartype at all. It's probably just rasterizing it exactly how Windows gives it to it, however that happens.)



              If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:




              • Make your text (and/or entire bitmap) twice the size you need in each direction (4 times the number of pixels).

              • Create your text and any other artwork.

              • Choose the "Resize" function, reduce both direction by 50%.


              Paint uses an ugly interpolation method, but the result for text - in the context of artowrk at least - is arguably better, because it reduces the effects of Microsoft's over-strong Cleartype font hinting. The result is somewhere in-between the full hinting you started with, and the no hinting of bind pixel resampling. Too much smaller than 50% though, and the effects of bad resampling start to dominate, and things get blurry where they shouldn't.)



              The problem with Cleartype is that it doesn't preserve the font's intended shapes. Microsoft prefers clear text on screen. So they use strong "hinting" to essentially hammer every horizontal or vertical part of each character, into the actual screen pixel grid - so that it is sharper to read. And it is sharper to read, but the tradeoff is that fonts look different than designed. Some remarkably so. (Others less so, such as the ones Microsoft designed specifically for on-screen Cleartype, such as Calibri.)



              Mac OS on the other hand, prefers font fidelity, and uses very little to no hinting. As a result, the fonts have lovelier shapes, but to some people are insultingly blurry. (Except on "Retina" displays.) It's highly personal - some are literally offended by it, I like it - and am not a fan of Cleartype.



              To me, Ubuntu takes the prize. You can adjust all the big things about font rendering:




              • Antialising type (grayscale, or "subpixel", and different RGB ordering for subpixel rendering on different LCD panel pixel arrangements)

              • Hinting type (basically none similar to Mac OS, vertical only [my favorite], and "full" [aka Microsoft hammer it all to the pixel grid]).






              share|improve this answer















              Campbell Wray was close.



              The only way you would see that effect in Paint, is if you were zoomed in > 1:1. If you click on the "View" tab and then click on "100%", then typed text will appear exactly while typing, as when done typing...Cleartype anti-aliasing and all. If you zoom in, say by clicking "Zoom in" three times, you'll clearly see the rainbow-colored clear-type anti-aliasing. (If you have that enabled as it is by default since Vista. Otherwise you'll just see bigger jaggies.)



              While zoomed in that far (400% I think), if you try adding text now, it will look clear and sharp while typing. Then when done, all jaggy and alias-ey and clear-type-ey.



              It's the fundamental concept of a bitmap or raster image. When you zoom in to 200%, every pixel in the image will be represented by four actual screen pixels (in a 2x bigger square). 400% = 16x more screen pixels per bitmap pixel, for a 4x bigger square. And so on. Paint just isn't sophisticated enough to render the text entry at the same zoomed-in "effective" resolution you are seeing once the text is rasterized to actual pixels (that you are then seeing zoomed in). So, it renders the text-entry at an exaggerated on-screen point size, to mathematically aproximate the size it will appear once rasterized to pixels. Photoshop does actually render text entry at >1:1 zooms, exactly as it will appear once done and rasterized. That's because Photoshop has it's own antialiasing engine that is sophisticated enough to take zoom into account, and simulate the output during entry.



              I actually think it's pretty interesting that Paint preserves Cleartype anti-aliasing. I didn't think that information was easily available to programs, it was more of a final rendering system buffer that applications can't access. So, either that theory is wrong, or there is some API to run the same font -> anti-aliasing -> bitmap for that very kind of purpose (that is ignorant of "zoom"), or Paint is just faking Cleartype rendering. (Which isn't far-fetched. Adobe Photoshop has a fake Cleartype antialiasing method, among it's other, arguably better internal methods. I can't remember what they call it - it's not "Cleartype" - and it's not identical, but close. Photoshop is cross-platform though, so that's not proof of anything really. And since Paint apparently isn't faking Cleartype rendering while taking zoom into account, it seems unlikely that Paint is faking Cleartype at all. It's probably just rasterizing it exactly how Windows gives it to it, however that happens.)



              If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:




              • Make your text (and/or entire bitmap) twice the size you need in each direction (4 times the number of pixels).

              • Create your text and any other artwork.

              • Choose the "Resize" function, reduce both direction by 50%.


              Paint uses an ugly interpolation method, but the result for text - in the context of artowrk at least - is arguably better, because it reduces the effects of Microsoft's over-strong Cleartype font hinting. The result is somewhere in-between the full hinting you started with, and the no hinting of bind pixel resampling. Too much smaller than 50% though, and the effects of bad resampling start to dominate, and things get blurry where they shouldn't.)



              The problem with Cleartype is that it doesn't preserve the font's intended shapes. Microsoft prefers clear text on screen. So they use strong "hinting" to essentially hammer every horizontal or vertical part of each character, into the actual screen pixel grid - so that it is sharper to read. And it is sharper to read, but the tradeoff is that fonts look different than designed. Some remarkably so. (Others less so, such as the ones Microsoft designed specifically for on-screen Cleartype, such as Calibri.)



              Mac OS on the other hand, prefers font fidelity, and uses very little to no hinting. As a result, the fonts have lovelier shapes, but to some people are insultingly blurry. (Except on "Retina" displays.) It's highly personal - some are literally offended by it, I like it - and am not a fan of Cleartype.



              To me, Ubuntu takes the prize. You can adjust all the big things about font rendering:




              • Antialising type (grayscale, or "subpixel", and different RGB ordering for subpixel rendering on different LCD panel pixel arrangements)

              • Hinting type (basically none similar to Mac OS, vertical only [my favorite], and "full" [aka Microsoft hammer it all to the pixel grid]).







              share|improve this answer














              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer








              edited Sep 3 '16 at 3:08

























              answered Sep 3 '16 at 2:41









              bubblesbubbles

              764




              764













              • "If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:" I don't understand this workaround, could you explain it more clearly?

                – Buffer Over Read
                Sep 3 '16 at 16:26








              • 1





                OK, let's say you just want a jpeg image of the sentence, "Eat more!" Let's say you want the font to be 20 pt. and not look so "Cleartyp-ey": 1) Select the text tool. 2) Select the font you want, and make it 40 pt. [Not 20 pt.] 3) Type the text you want ["Eat more!"]. 4) Then click the mouse somewhere else, to rasterize the text. 5) Resize the image with the "Resize" button. Enter 50% for both width and height. Now you'll have 20 pt. text that is still be anti-aliased, just not so "Cleartype-ey" as if you had entered it in 20 pt. to begin with.

                – bubbles
                Sep 3 '16 at 21:48





















              • "If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:" I don't understand this workaround, could you explain it more clearly?

                – Buffer Over Read
                Sep 3 '16 at 16:26








              • 1





                OK, let's say you just want a jpeg image of the sentence, "Eat more!" Let's say you want the font to be 20 pt. and not look so "Cleartyp-ey": 1) Select the text tool. 2) Select the font you want, and make it 40 pt. [Not 20 pt.] 3) Type the text you want ["Eat more!"]. 4) Then click the mouse somewhere else, to rasterize the text. 5) Resize the image with the "Resize" button. Enter 50% for both width and height. Now you'll have 20 pt. text that is still be anti-aliased, just not so "Cleartype-ey" as if you had entered it in 20 pt. to begin with.

                – bubbles
                Sep 3 '16 at 21:48



















              "If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:" I don't understand this workaround, could you explain it more clearly?

              – Buffer Over Read
              Sep 3 '16 at 16:26







              "If you actually want prettier text than Cleartype though, then there is a workaround in Paint:" I don't understand this workaround, could you explain it more clearly?

              – Buffer Over Read
              Sep 3 '16 at 16:26






              1




              1





              OK, let's say you just want a jpeg image of the sentence, "Eat more!" Let's say you want the font to be 20 pt. and not look so "Cleartyp-ey": 1) Select the text tool. 2) Select the font you want, and make it 40 pt. [Not 20 pt.] 3) Type the text you want ["Eat more!"]. 4) Then click the mouse somewhere else, to rasterize the text. 5) Resize the image with the "Resize" button. Enter 50% for both width and height. Now you'll have 20 pt. text that is still be anti-aliased, just not so "Cleartype-ey" as if you had entered it in 20 pt. to begin with.

              – bubbles
              Sep 3 '16 at 21:48







              OK, let's say you just want a jpeg image of the sentence, "Eat more!" Let's say you want the font to be 20 pt. and not look so "Cleartyp-ey": 1) Select the text tool. 2) Select the font you want, and make it 40 pt. [Not 20 pt.] 3) Type the text you want ["Eat more!"]. 4) Then click the mouse somewhere else, to rasterize the text. 5) Resize the image with the "Resize" button. Enter 50% for both width and height. Now you'll have 20 pt. text that is still be anti-aliased, just not so "Cleartype-ey" as if you had entered it in 20 pt. to begin with.

              – bubbles
              Sep 3 '16 at 21:48















              1














              It's likely related to the image being too small.



              When you see the preview text it is a vector and looks very smooth, however when you click off the text to finalise it Paint rasterises the text and it becomes pixelated.



              Now I don't have Paint in front of me but if it's like other image editors you should be able to change the image resolution somewhere, this will mean that there are more pixels for the text and it should look clearer.






              share|improve this answer




























                1














                It's likely related to the image being too small.



                When you see the preview text it is a vector and looks very smooth, however when you click off the text to finalise it Paint rasterises the text and it becomes pixelated.



                Now I don't have Paint in front of me but if it's like other image editors you should be able to change the image resolution somewhere, this will mean that there are more pixels for the text and it should look clearer.






                share|improve this answer


























                  1












                  1








                  1







                  It's likely related to the image being too small.



                  When you see the preview text it is a vector and looks very smooth, however when you click off the text to finalise it Paint rasterises the text and it becomes pixelated.



                  Now I don't have Paint in front of me but if it's like other image editors you should be able to change the image resolution somewhere, this will mean that there are more pixels for the text and it should look clearer.






                  share|improve this answer













                  It's likely related to the image being too small.



                  When you see the preview text it is a vector and looks very smooth, however when you click off the text to finalise it Paint rasterises the text and it becomes pixelated.



                  Now I don't have Paint in front of me but if it's like other image editors you should be able to change the image resolution somewhere, this will mean that there are more pixels for the text and it should look clearer.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered Sep 3 '16 at 1:34









                  Campbell WrayCampbell Wray

                  111




                  111























                      0














                      open another paint session. Go to "properties". Select Black and White. Now type whatever word and all the pixels generated will be black. Then make sure it's at 100% zoom, then you can use Snipping Tool to copy it and paste it into the other Paint session.






                      share|improve this answer




























                        0














                        open another paint session. Go to "properties". Select Black and White. Now type whatever word and all the pixels generated will be black. Then make sure it's at 100% zoom, then you can use Snipping Tool to copy it and paste it into the other Paint session.






                        share|improve this answer


























                          0












                          0








                          0







                          open another paint session. Go to "properties". Select Black and White. Now type whatever word and all the pixels generated will be black. Then make sure it's at 100% zoom, then you can use Snipping Tool to copy it and paste it into the other Paint session.






                          share|improve this answer













                          open another paint session. Go to "properties". Select Black and White. Now type whatever word and all the pixels generated will be black. Then make sure it's at 100% zoom, then you can use Snipping Tool to copy it and paste it into the other Paint session.







                          share|improve this answer












                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer










                          answered Jan 5 at 16:52









                          guestguest

                          1




                          1






























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded




















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid



                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1120465%2fis-there-a-fix-to-prevent-text-input-in-paint-from-being-very-aliased-blurry%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                              }
                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Plaza Victoria

                              In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

                              How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...