previous by date | index | next by date |
previous in topic | topic list | next in topic |
Thanks for the welcome. Yes, I am referring to the text height. All text sizes for that matter. I have always used DIN 1451 for text except for some logos where I use a script font which looks awesome. When I say clearer it is more aesthetic than functional. The .4mm looks more "stamped" for lack of a better word. Text appears to run into the next letter more. The appearance is coarser and not as refined. The .2mm is detailed and just looks better to my eye. It does have less of that engraved look though. I still use .4mm for tick marks although lately I have been alternating between the two per 15 degree tick. Charles.Welcome Charles,
> started with the.4mm because that is what Tony's files had. Then
> I started experimenting with the .2mm tool. It is so much clearer
> and better looking especially for text in the 2.5 to 4mm range.
> Anybody else notice this? Charles.
>
I never experimented much with the text, so this is interesting. By "text
in the 2.5 to 4mm range" are you referring to the Text height in the Text
engraving Properties box? Have you looked at fonts other than DIN 1451, 1
stroke? Is it "clearer" under varying lighting conditions?
Jeff
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
motmpanels-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .