Live data from Hacker News

5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

maurycyz.com

11–20 of 168 posts

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#11

Too bad "tiny screens" pretty much do not exist anymore. Screens with hundreds of pixels on each side are very cheap already. It reminds me people who research "colorizing grayscale photos", which do not exist anymore either (if you want a color photo of someone you met in your life, there probably exists a color photo of that person).

> Too bad "tiny screens" pretty much do not exist anymore.

https://www.crystalfontz.com/product/cfal12856a00151b-128x56... - 128x56

https://www.crystalfontz.com/product/cfag12864u4nfi-128x64-t... - 128x64

There's a whole world of embedded devices with wide varieties of screen resolutions.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#12

Too bad "tiny screens" pretty much do not exist anymore. Screens with hundreds of pixels on each side are very cheap already. It reminds me people who research "colorizing grayscale photos", which do not exist anymore either (if you want a color photo of someone you met in your life, there probably exists a color photo of that person).

Quick browsing at adafruit.com (or any other similar vendor), reveals plenty of displays that are 128, 240, and 320 pixels wide. At 6 pixels of width per character, that's only 21, 40, and 53 characters wide. Seems quite useful to me.

There are also several 32x32 led panels, which one could imagine needing some text.

Also, this kind of thing is just interesting, regardless of the usefulness.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#15
If the author sees this. I think the lower case t would benefit from a pixel above the cross, similar to how the lower case k goes up one more pixel. It looks a lot like the capital T with how it is now. It is very well done though. Thanks for sharing.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#16
> 4x4: Not enough to draw "E", "M" or "W" properly.

However, 5x5 isn't enough to draw "e" properly if you also want lowercase letters to have less height than uppercase, so you need at least 6 vertical pixels. And then that isn't enough to draw any character with a descender properly, so you need at least 7 vertical pixels (technically you should have 8 in order to allow "g" and "y" to have a distinct horizontal descender while still sitting on the baseline, but this is probably an acceptable compromise). And remember that in practice this means you will still need at least 8x6 pixels to draw each character, to allow for a visible gap between letters below and beside them.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#17
The 3x2 is fascinating, it's the same resolution as braille, albeit rotated 90 degrees. I wonder if this could become a braille-like system that's both visually and finger-readable.

Note: there are repeat glyphs here like c and o, though the example actually uses a different c somehow. But perhaps repeats are ok given context.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#18

Too bad "tiny screens" pretty much do not exist anymore. Screens with hundreds of pixels on each side are very cheap already. It reminds me people who research "colorizing grayscale photos", which do not exist anymore either (if you want a color photo of someone you met in your life, there probably exists a color photo of that person).

There exist plenty of reasons to colorize grayscale photos in 2026.

* a huge corpus of historical imagery

* cheaper grayscale cameras + post processing will surely enable all sorts of uses we haven't imagined yet.

* a lower power CCD and post-processing after the fact or on a different device allows for better power budget in cheap drones (etc).

* these algorithms can likely be tuned or used as a stepping stone for ones that convert non-visible wavelengths into color images.

And that's just off the top of my head as someone who doesn't really work with that stuff. I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons I can't think of.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#19
You can get nicer 5x5 fonts amd it was not that uncommon back in the day. 4 wide is not too bad if you make the center of M and W just two pixels inset from top or bottom respectively or borrow the spacing column.

Plenty of systems did it like CP/M on the Spectrum +3 and it looks pretty decent.

Post reply on HN