Re: modern-straight and flat- flags too thick and too spaced apart

[edes]

el 2019-02-17 a las 21:41 Thomas Morley escribió:

> Speaking only for myself I think the OP is correct saying flat-flags
> should behave like Beams, though I don't agree for
> modern/old-straight-flags.

And now I tend to agree with you... :-)

Both examples I mentioned in my other email (Boulez and Stockhausen)
suggest that for straight flags the total distance between consecutive
flags is one staff-space, and the thickness is staff-space*0.6 (that is, a
separation of staff-space*0.4 between flags). Approximate, of course. But I
modified some flags in Inkscape according to those proportions and they fit
perfectly to the Stockhausen score (in Le Marteau they are a bit thinner,
but the total distance remains one staff-space).

Thank you for looking into this.

ee




--

___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: modern-straight and flat- flags too thick and too spaced apart

[Carl Sorensen]

On 2/17/19, 7:52 PM, "edes"  wrote:


el 2019-02-17 a las 21:41 Thomas Morley escribió:

> I'm currently working on it.

Thank you!


> Though, there is a design-decision we need to do.

Indeed...

In general terms, I stand by my original opinion that both flat *and*
modern-straight flags should behave like beams (but I might be missing
something, of course...).

But the Stockhausen examples you show don't behave like *traditional* beams.  
The Stockhausen examples show the flags all coming from the stem at the same 
point relative to the staff lines.  Traditional beams vary where they are 
relative to the staff lines (lower ones rest, middle ones straddle, higher ones 
hang, IIRC).  Since the Stockhausen beams don't live on the staff, they don't 
have to be concerned about the staff lines, and I suspect they are just one 
staff-space apart, although I haven't measured carefully.

In the Crumb piece, we can't tell what's happening with the flat flags/beams; 
they aren't on the staff lines.  But I suspect that they are exactly one 
staff-space apart, so they don't behave like traditional beams either.

I think this discussion belongs on the -user list, not the bug list, as we're 
now talking about aesthetics, so I've copied it over there.

Thanks,

Carl

 

___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: modern-straight and flat- flags too thick and too spaced apart

[Thomas Morley]

Am So., 17. Feb. 2019 um 20:57 Uhr schrieb Carl Sorensen :
>
>
>
> On 2/16/19, 7:22 PM, "edes"  wrote:
>
>
> Hello, list.
>
> Some time ago I reported a bug with modern-straight and flat flags, and it
> was accepted as issue 5412:
>
> https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5412/
>
> I only have a very basic knowledge of lilypond, but I assume that this
> problem happens at the font level, and that there is no way to improve the
> output by tweaking the lilypond code?
>
> It turns out that the straight family of  flags is actually implemented in 
> scheme.
>
> The file is scm/flag-styles.scm
>
> The thicknesses are hard-coded at lines 111 (modern-straight-flag), 117 
> (old-straight-flag), and 122 (flat-flag).
>
> The names of the variables (which show up only as numbers in these calls) are 
> found at line 60.
>
> Unfortunately, at this point there does not appear to be any grob property 
> for  the thickness, so there is not a straightforward override.  You'll need 
> to edit the scheme file.  Or, you could define your own straight flag style 
> by copying (and altering) one of the flag definitions.
>
> If you get some better numbers, and especially if you have some evidence from 
> nicely-engraved scores, it's likely that we would replace the defaults.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carl

Hi Carl,

I'm currently working on it.

Better default values are easy to obtain:

#(define-public (flat-flag grob)
  "Flat flag style.  The angles of the flags are both 0 degrees"
  ((straight-flag 0.48 0.81 0 1.0 0 1.0) grob))


Though, there is a design-decision we need to do.

Currently the straight-flags are modeled like default Flag-glyphs.
This means if there are more than 3 flags the spacing is not adjusted
(like for beams). Furthermore the end of the stem and flag match
exactly, as opposed to beams (at least they should, there's a small
discrepancy, already reported by the OP).
If we keep this thinking, than (flat) straight-flags stay different
compared to Beams.

The OP claims straight-flags, especially flat ones, should behave like
Beams. If we follow, than straight-flags need to adjust according to
the amount of flags, like Beams. Furthermore they should be placed so
that the stem ends in the _middle_ of the first flag, as for beams.
Disadvantage would be that a stem with default flag would often have a
different visible length compared to a stem with straight flags.

Speaking only for myself I think the OP is correct saying flat-flags
should behave like Beams, though I don't agree for
modern/old-straight-flags.


So the question is, which route to follow?


I already have code for the mentioned possibilties, but currently I'm
not able to do one thing for flat-flag and a different for other
straight-flags.
In any case the length of beamed and unbeamed Stems is different in
many cases. One would need to tackle Stem not Flag, so a different
issue, imho.


Cheers,
  Harm

___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: modern-straight and flat- flags too thick and too spaced apart

[Carl Sorensen]

On 2/16/19, 7:22 PM, "edes"  wrote:


Hello, list.

Some time ago I reported a bug with modern-straight and flat flags, and it
was accepted as issue 5412:

https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5412/

I only have a very basic knowledge of lilypond, but I assume that this
problem happens at the font level, and that there is no way to improve the
output by tweaking the lilypond code?

It turns out that the straight family of  flags is actually implemented in 
scheme.

The file is scm/flag-styles.scm

The thicknesses are hard-coded at lines 111 (modern-straight-flag), 117 
(old-straight-flag), and 122 (flat-flag).

The names of the variables (which show up only as numbers in these calls) are 
found at line 60.

Unfortunately, at this point there does not appear to be any grob property for  
the thickness, so there is not a straightforward override.  You'll need to edit 
the scheme file.  Or, you could define your own straight flag style by copying 
(and altering) one of the flag definitions.

If you get some better numbers, and especially if you have some evidence from 
nicely-engraved scores, it's likely that we would replace the defaults.

Thanks,

Carl


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: modern-straight and flat- flags too thick and too spaced apart

[edes]

Hello, list.

Some time ago I reported a bug with modern-straight and flat flags, and it
was accepted as issue 5412:

https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5412/

I only have a very basic knowledge of lilypond, but I assume that this
problem happens at the font level, and that there is no way to improve the
output by tweaking the lilypond code?

If this is the case, could you please point me to the relevant place in the
source code? I'm not a programmer (and I always found scheme to be
particularly obscure), but I could try to adjust values by trial and
error, and see if I can get a more decent output.

Thanks.

ee



--


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: modern-straight and flat- flags too thick and too spaced apart

[Simon Albrecht]

Thanks, this has been entered as 
.


Best, Simon


On 27.08.2018 01:08, edes wrote:

Hello, list.

For some reason, when using modern-straight-flag or flat-flag, flags are
much thicker than normal beams, and the distance is also much bigger.

Straight and flat flags were widely used by modern composers like Pierre
Boulez and Karlheinz Stockhausen, and in all cases flags were treated like
beams, with the same distance and the same width.

Please see the attached examples and images (I'm using 2.12.0 from git).

BTW, the first flag does not align with the end of the stem.

Best,

e.

8< ---

\version "2.21.0"

\layout {
   \context {
 \Score
   \override Flag.stencil = #flat-flag
   }
}

\relative c' {
<<
   {
 r8. d'16 d d d d  d r8 r32 d32 d[ d d d] d32 r16. }
   \\
   { r8. g,16 g g g g  g r8 r32 g32 g[ g g g] g32 r16. }
}

8< ---

\version "2.21.0"

\layout {
   \context {
 \Score
   \override Flag.stencil = #modern-straight-flag
   }
}

\relative c' {
<<
   {
 r8. d'16 d d d d  d r8 r32 d32 d[ d d d] d32 r16. }
   \\
   { r8. g,16 g g g g  g r8 r32 g32 g[ g g g] g32 r16. }
}

8< ---



--


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond



___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

modern-straight and flat- flags too thick and too spaced apart

[edes]

Hello, list.

For some reason, when using modern-straight-flag or flat-flag, flags are
much thicker than normal beams, and the distance is also much bigger.

Straight and flat flags were widely used by modern composers like Pierre
Boulez and Karlheinz Stockhausen, and in all cases flags were treated like
beams, with the same distance and the same width.

Please see the attached examples and images (I'm using 2.12.0 from git).

BTW, the first flag does not align with the end of the stem.

Best,

e.

8< ---

\version "2.21.0"

\layout {
  \context {
\Score
  \override Flag.stencil = #flat-flag
  }
}

\relative c' {
<<
  { 
r8. d'16 d d d d  d r8 r32 d32 d[ d d d] d32 r16. }
  \\
  { r8. g,16 g g g g  g r8 r32 g32 g[ g g g] g32 r16. }
>>
}

8< ---

\version "2.21.0"

\layout {
  \context {
\Score
  \override Flag.stencil = #modern-straight-flag
  }
}

\relative c' {
<<
  { 
r8. d'16 d d d d  d r8 r32 d32 d[ d d d] d32 r16. }
  \\
  { r8. g,16 g g g g  g r8 r32 g32 g[ g g g] g32 r16. }
>>
}

8< ---



--
\version "2.21.0"

\layout {
  \context {
\Score
  \override Flag.stencil = #flat-flag
  }
}

\relative c' {
<<
  { 
r8. d'16 d d d d  d r8 r32 d32 d[ d d d] d32 r16. }
  \\
  { r8. g,16 g g g g  g r8 r32 g32 g[ g g g] g32 r16. }
>>
}\version "2.21.0"

\layout {
  \context {
\Score
  \override Flag.stencil = #modern-straight-flag
  }
}

\relative c' {
<<
  { 
r8. d'16 d d d d  d r8 r32 d32 d[ d d d] d32 r16. }
  \\
  { r8. g,16 g g g g  g r8 r32 g32 g[ g g g] g32 r16. }
>>
}___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond