Simon Albrecht-2 wrote >> The set-global-staff-size approach also seems >> to leave the staff lines and stems proportionally thinner at larger >> sizes. > … which is a good thing, since it preserves the optical impression > instead of keeping the numerical proportions. > If the proportions would remain the same independent of the staff size, > small staves would look too light and be more difficult to read, and > large staves would become too heavy and appear clumsy. > It’s the same with text fonts, by the way: high quality typefaces (e.g. > the TeX standard Latin Modern font as used also in LilyPond) usually > have different shapes for different font sizes. Thus large headers get > thinner lines, more detail etc. and small annotations or whatever get > broader lines and less detail for the sake of legibility and a > consistent visual appearance.
Hi Simon, You're right, and I didn't mean to imply that there was anything wrong with set-global-staff-size. I do find that at larger sizes (like 1.75 times or 2 times as large) I prefer the results of the strict scaling I get with Inkscape to the results of set-global-staff-size (where the lines and stems look too thin to me). That's a size of 35 or 40, whereas the largest size the feta font is optimized for is 25.2: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/setting-the-staff-size So I wonder whether the proportions have been fine-tuned for sizes much larger than that? I should probably use set-global-staff-size at 25.2 and then use Inkscape to scale up from there. (Why such large staves? For posting SVG images online.) Cheers, -Paul -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/With-markup-score-can-I-separately-control-the-score-size-tp163772p163858.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
