Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

maurycyz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 168 posts

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#21

Post by joefourier »

IvanK_net wrote: post #6

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. Screens with hundreds of pixels on each side are very cheap already.

Find me a 0.66" OLED display for ~$1 that has hundreds of pixels on each side then.

> 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).

What train of thought led you to think people are primarily researching colorising new B&W photos? As opposed to historical ones, or those of relatives taken when they were young? You can take a colour photo of granddad today but most likely the photos of him in his 20s are all in black and white.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#22

Post by mulr00ney »

kibwen wrote: post #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 desc…

I think the `e` looks better in the 'real pixels' example they gave; I find my tends to 'fill in' the space of the top part of the letter, and I suspect in the context of a longer sentence it'd be pretty easy to parse.

(but yeah, it's not quite right, and is especially jarring in the nice, clean, blown up pixels in the top example)

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#24

Post by ghssds »

You could do a bit better with a 4x5 font for every characters except M, W, m, and w which would be 5x5 but use the pixels normaly used to separate them from the next character, so every caracters still use the same width.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#26

Post by IvanK_net »

joefourier wrote: post #21
IvanK_net wrote: post #6

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. Screens with hundreds of pixels on each side are very cheap already. Find me a 0.66" OLED display for ~$1 that has hundreds of pixels on each side then. > 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 per…

If you know a person who is 70 years old, they were 20 in 1975 - color photos existed back then.

Every grayscale photo of someone famous has already been colorized during the past 50 years. If there are only grayscale photos of you, you were probably born before 1900, and all your friends or your children (who might want to colorize your photo) are probably dead, too.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#27

Post by gpm »

soperj wrote: post #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.

I think I'd go with something like

     x
    xxx
     x
     xx

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#28

Post by IvanK_net »

sophacles wrote: post #18
IvanK_net wrote: post #6

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 o…

Grayscale cameras are not that much cheaper than color cameras. And if you decided to use a grayscale camera on purpose, you probably do not care about the color information (which would be totally "made up" by the colorizing algorithm).

Also, if there are only grayscale photos of you, you were probably born before 1900, and all your friends or your children (who might want to colorize your photo) are probably dead, too.

Re: 5x5 Pixel font for tiny screens

#29

Post by zimpenfish »

IvanK_net wrote: post #26
joefourier wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Too bad "tiny screens" pretty much do not exist anymore. Screens with hundreds of pixels on each side are very cheap already. Find me a 0.66" OLED display for ~$1 that has hundreds of pixels on each side then. > 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 per…

If you know a person who is 70 years old, they were 20 in 1975 - color photos existed back then. Every grayscale photo of someone famous has already been colorized during the past 50 years. If there are only grayscale photos of you, you were probably born before 1900, and all your friends or your children (who might want to colorize your photo) are probably dead, too.

> If you know a person who is 70 years old, they were 20 in 1975

Bloody hell, warn people before you post things like that.

Post reply on HN