Re: [ft-devel] Patent info for LCD subpixel filter

[Behdad Esfahbod]

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> wrote:

> At least in the English that I learned, two things that are not the
> same are different.  So I find the claim that "they are more same
> than different, as such are not different" to be patently false.

???  What are you referring to?

I'm referring to the following part of email from Alexei in the thread "Haarmony LCD rendering":

"""

I have been soliciting feedback for a few month now specifically
regarding the Clear Type patents. Some folks pointed out this specific
paragraph: "The color values are independently generated for each of
the red, green, and blue pixel sub-components based on different
portions of the image, rather than the color values for the entire
pixel being generated based on a single sample or the same portion of
the image." This is indeed fundamental to ClearType, where each color
channel gets coverage information from completely *different*
(distinct, non-overlapping) portions of the glyph. It is too bad that
it also results in *unequal* coverage of each channel grid (aka color
fringes) and filtering becomes necessary to equalize the channels.

So, Harmony is equalized to begin with because shifting does not
change the integrated channel coverage. As for the patents, the
adjacent channels get coverage from parts of glyph that have 2/3
overlap (truly, more similar than different). This is how I would
argue that this technique is substantially not ClearType.

"""

--

behdad
http://behdad.org/