On Wednesday 14 June 2006 17:25, Stephen wrote: > Your right, Lilypond does not produce PDF files, ghostscript does. So the > only thing Lilypond could do is add additional hinting in the PostScript > file as Hans has already suggested. And as you've already pointed out, what > matters is how the music looks printed out. It is inadviseable to practice > your instrument looking at the 72 dpi of the computer screen rather than a > 300 dpi printed score. That's bad for your eyes.
I think there exist music stands consisting of TFT displays nowadays, so good on-screen rendering is desirable to some extent. However, I'd advise to produce png output if you want to view output on screen: pngs are optimised for on-screen viewing regardless of which viewer you use, and they can probably be displayed a lot faster than pdf or ps can. > The PDF files certainly > are perfectly readable and legible, so therefore, I don't think it is sad > or even undesireable to have the slight aliasing issues you see. After all, > 72 dpi will always be inferior to 300 dpi no matter how you slice it. If > Lilypond is optimized for 300 dpi, that is a good thing. btw, lily is optimized for 600 dpi iirc: the stems have slightly rounded edges, this is not visible on resolutions below 600dpi. -- Erik _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
