Here's a gray scale version. Lighter by far. \version "2.19.46" \include "logo-gray.ily"
%% Syntax is \markup\logoGray #size %% Test: \markup\logoGray #5 I've already tried an outlined b/w version but I'm not satisfied with it yet. Cheers, Pierre 2016-08-04 13:26 GMT+02:00 bb <bb-543...@telecolumbus.net>: > If any logo, I prefer the b/w version! I never print music sheets with a > colour printer. > > Regards > > > Am 04.08.2016 um 13:17 schrieb Pierre Perol-Schneider: > > Hi Malte, Hi All > > Here's a first attempt to produce a vectorialised logo. > The file uses the new v2.19 markup path syntax. > I've reduced the number of colors so the image is a combination of 46 > layers/colors. > Still, and as already pointed, the file is pretty heavy (649 ko/ca. 8400 > lines) so I cannot send it through the list. > I'll send it anyway privately to Malte and Kieren who have shown interest > for it but, of course, I'll send it to all of you on demand. > Comments are welcome. > > Attached is a screen shot of the following test : > > \version "2.19.46" > \include "logo.ily" > > %% Syntax is \markup\logo #size > %% Test: > \markup\logo #5 > > If there are some interest, I'll try to draw an optional b/w logo > > HTH. > > Cheers, > Pierre > > > 2016-08-03 18:27 GMT+02:00 Malte Meyn <lilyp...@maltemeyn.de>: > >> Am 03.08.2016 um 18:07 schrieb Pierre-Luc Gauthier: >> >>> 2016-08-03 11:03 GMT-04:00 Andrew Bernard <andrew.bern...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> The concept is fine I am sure, but the execution difficult, and >>>> acceptance >>>> problematical. >>>> >>> >> I know it’s difficult but does that mean one cannot try? >> >> Logo design is fraught with difficulty, and you will inevitably end up >>>> with >>>> something half the population does not like. >>>> >>> >> I think that might be realistic but not problematic. If someone doesn’t >> like the logo, they don’t have to use it; of course it would be nice to >> have something that is at least acceptable for most people. >> >> And this argument works also for the current logo (an image of a >> waterlily flower, two leaves, and a score in the background): It’s a nice >> picture, but I don’t like it as a logo because it cannot be used in print >> (at least in small sizes). >> >> I agree, >>> but since there already *is* a logo, >>> wouldn't it be acceptable to "simply" make it a b/w vectorialised >>> version of it? >>> >> >> That would be nice but I doubt one can make a convincing b/w version of >> that. Even if you leave out the background it’s a very complex image. And >> even if you manage to make a b/w version of that it’s not usable at small >> sizes. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lilypond-user mailing list >> lilypond-user@gnu.org >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing > listlilypond-user@gnu.orghttps://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > > > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > >
logo-gray.ily
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
