On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> wrote: > >>> Frankly, I don't see the point in simulating well-craftedness by >>> artificially introducing minor deficiencies associated with some of >>> the better work. >> >> @Werner: i could live with an *option* doing this, but i doubt that >> people are interested in writing it. And i think we have much, >> much, much more important stuff to work on. > > I think I was still unclear, since you both missed my point. The > engraver's main deficiencies IMHO were imprecise positioning of the > stamped beams. But using stamps instead of hand-cutting such small > slurs and ties was an *intentional* decision.
I think it was for efficiency's sake. It takes less time to stamp something than carve it, and small slurs seem to be more difficult to carve manually, too. > Lilypond already does a > good job, as the attached image shows, but there might be cases where > this isn't so, and adding some discreteness might improve the visual > results. Maybe... but i'd have too see an example, i cannot myself imagine any situation where that would be the case. >>> We don't make slightly eroded staff lines copying the wear and tear >>> on the tools of particularly renowned publishers, either. > > Well, to be honest, this is debatable. There is something similar in > the typography: ITC Founder's Caslon > > http://www.fonts.com/NR/rdonlyres/925BEFBB-34EE-4D67-94A6-9B018A02F313/0/FoundersCaslon.pdf > > With some background here (describing another revival of Caslon): > > http://ilovetypography.com/2010/07/26/reviving-caslon-the-snare-of-authenticity/ Interesting! Thanks for sharing :) Janek _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel