1

It's more pleasing to me to stare at this...

TeX font

... than to stare at this...

LaTeX font

One time Knuth commented that he prefers fonts with a little randomization on their design (Knuth, D. E. (1979). Mathematical typography. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 1(2), 337–373. See page 369.)

Are TeX fonts designed with a little randomization and LaTeX not? (Why would you guess I prefer TeX here? Anything that comes to mind?) Thank you!

Joep Awinita
  • 371
  • 1
    Ideally, you'd want randomization applied to each character, i.e. not all e's to look the same. My guess is that that would take a fair bit of computing time. – JPi Feb 20 '19 at 14:19
  • 4
    As an aside, it would be nice to see the same text typeset two different ways. – JPi Feb 20 '19 at 14:24
  • Does https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/161920/randomized-drawing-of-individual-glyphs answer your question? – JPi Feb 20 '19 at 14:39
  • 1
    Possible duplicate of Randomized drawing of individual glyphs – JPi Feb 20 '19 at 15:35
  • 7
    @JPi It is not a duplicate. That question is about how to achieve randomization. This question, although the OP has asked it badly by assuming an explanation, is about why the fonts look different. (And the answer is not randomization.) To the OP: The answer to your question as asked is "No, there is no randomization". But I think your real question is in the parentheses at the end: why do they look different? Well straightaway I can see that the rasterization is different. How were the two images generated? Did you use tex and then dvips or dvipdfmx for example? – ShreevatsaR Feb 20 '19 at 16:06
  • ok, I've retracted my close vote @ShreevatsaR – JPi Feb 20 '19 at 16:16
  • If at all it is a duplicate, it is a potential duplicate of Are the original CM fonts better than the current type1 fonts? — but we won't know for sure until the OP says what the respective programs used were. – ShreevatsaR Feb 20 '19 at 16:17

0 Answers0