# Font anti-aliasing: Processing 2 vs Processing 3

**URL:** https://discourse.processing.org/t/font-anti-aliasing-processing-2-vs-processing-3/4345
**Category:** Processing
**Created:** [October 10, 2018, 10:33pm UTC](https://discourse.processing.org/t/font-anti-aliasing-processing-2-vs-processing-3/4345 "2018-10-10T22:33:00Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![dtmr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@dtmr](https://discourse.processing.org/u/dtmr)
#### Post date: [October 10, 2018, 10:33pm UTC](https://discourse.processing.org/t/font-anti-aliasing-processing-2-vs-processing-3/4345/1 "2018-10-10T22:33:01Z")

</div>

Processing 2.0.3 produces very different font anti-aliasing compared to Processing 3. Top Processing 2, bottom Processing 2:  
 ![Sample](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex036/uploads/processingfoundation1/original/2X/d/d412458884b87e996a9505ae05461c70f3b0db51.png)

Can this be fixed in the code for Processing 2, so that it looks like Processing 3? Higher values for smooth(4, 8) had no noteworthy effect. I use CreateFont().

Background: I build Windows/Android versions with Processing 3 but MacOS/Linux versions with Processing 2.0.3, due to lack of support for MacOS-cross-compilation in Processing 3 and because Linux builds of Processing 2.0.3 work with slightly older Linux installations out of the box.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![jeremydouglass](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex036/user_avatar/discourse.processing.org/jeremydouglass/32/20_2.png) [@jeremydouglass](https://discourse.processing.org/u/jeremydouglass)
#### Post date: [October 24, 2018, 6:26pm UTC](https://discourse.processing.org/t/font-anti-aliasing-processing-2-vs-processing-3/4345/2 "2018-10-24T18:26:39Z")

</div>

@dtmr – normally I wouldn’t redirect programming questions to the github repo, but in this case the question of why this is different and whether there might be a workaround between Processing versions seems like a question for the core development team. Your background statement is a really useful use case and should be included in an issue submitted there.

> **[processing/processing](https://github.com/processing/processing/)**
>
> Source code for the Processing Core and Development Environment (PDE) - processing/processing

Processing 2 probably won’t be changed – that would break everybody’s Processing 2 stuff – but there might be a way for you to roll your own patch or back-port.