Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote: >> This doesn't make a lot of sense: you should print out the PDF on a >> 1200 dpi printer, and see how it looks on paper. Screen appearances >> are misleading. > > OK, so if we print it out on a 1200 dpi printer, how do we get approval for > it? Do we scan the resulting printout? Or do we just take Marc's word that > it looks fine? > > Any insight would be greatly appreciated. I just mean: to see how it works, you need to look at it on paper, rather than on screen, as lilypond output is meant to printed rather than viewed online. I'll have a look later today -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
On 1/1/10 4:08 PM, "Han-Wen Nienhuys" wrote: > On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Marc Hohl wrote: > >>> >>> IIUC, you should do the following: >>> >>> 1) Make a sample at 1200 dpi and post it somewhere so that we can be >>> satisfied that it looks right at 1200 dpi. >>> >> >> Ok, I used the same example and created a sample page. >> It is available as a 1200 dpi png picture at: >> >> http://www.hohlart.de/marc/gcleftest.png >> >> Please ignore the message about the clef in the first line. > > This doesn't make a lot of sense: you should print out the PDF on a > 1200 dpi printer, and see how it looks on paper. Screen appearances > are misleading. OK, so if we print it out on a 1200 dpi printer, how do we get approval for it? Do we scan the resulting printout? Or do we just take Marc's word that it looks fine? Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Marc Hohl wrote: >> >> IIUC, you should do the following: >> >> 1) Make a sample at 1200 dpi and post it somewhere so that we can be >> satisfied that it looks right at 1200 dpi. >> > > Ok, I used the same example and created a sample page. > It is available as a 1200 dpi png picture at: > > http://www.hohlart.de/marc/gcleftest.png > > Please ignore the message about the clef in the first line. This doesn't make a lot of sense: you should print out the PDF on a 1200 dpi printer, and see how it looks on paper. Screen appearances are misleading. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 1/1/10 2:52 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: Carl Sorensen schrieb: [...] Ok, so I'll go for this. It isn't as easy as I thought, because I cannot just rotate the whole picture, because the path is too complex for metafont. So I'll have to transform every point and draw thereafter. It seems to work, but I have to change some explicit drawing angles accordingly and bring it into a less hackish form - but I think this will come next year ;-) Well, I'm putting most of my work off to next year, too. Back again! I managed to describe the transformation in a more elegant way and the result looks (after initially rotating 1.5 degrees in the wrong direction!) very pleasing. What should be the next step? Shall I create a patch and send it to you, or should this go to rietveld? Should we wait for more opinions to come in? IIUC, you should do the following: 1) Make a sample at 1200 dpi and post it somewhere so that we can be satisfied that it looks right at 1200 dpi. Ok, I used the same example and created a sample page. It is available as a 1200 dpi png picture at: http://www.hohlart.de/marc/gcleftest.png Please ignore the message about the clef in the first line. 2) Either send me a patch so that I can post it on rietveld, or post it yourself on rietveld. As I don't have prepared everything for posting at rietveld, I would ask you do upload this patch for me. Thanks in advance Marc 3) Wait for approval, probably by Han-Wen and Jan, since they are the core designers of the font. Thanks, Carl Font-rotating-the-g-clef-for-better-apperance.patch.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
On 1/1/10 2:52 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: > Carl Sorensen schrieb: >> [...] >>> Ok, so I'll go for this. It isn't as easy as I thought, because I cannot >>> just rotate the whole picture, because the path is too complex for metafont. >>> So I'll have to transform every point and draw thereafter. It seems to >>> work, but >>> I have to change some explicit drawing angles accordingly and bring it into >>> a less hackish form - but I think this will come next year ;-) >>> >> >> Well, I'm putting most of my work off to next year, too. >> > Back again! > I managed to describe the transformation in a more elegant way > and the result looks (after initially rotating 1.5 degrees in the > wrong direction!) very pleasing. > > What should be the next step? Shall I create a patch and send it to you, > or should this go to rietveld? Should we wait for more opinions to come > in? IIUC, you should do the following: 1) Make a sample at 1200 dpi and post it somewhere so that we can be satisfied that it looks right at 1200 dpi. 2) Either send me a patch so that I can post it on rietveld, or post it yourself on rietveld. 3) Wait for approval, probably by Han-Wen and Jan, since they are the core designers of the font. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
Carl Sorensen schrieb: [...] Ok, so I'll go for this. It isn't as easy as I thought, because I cannot just rotate the whole picture, because the path is too complex for metafont. So I'll have to transform every point and draw thereafter. It seems to work, but I have to change some explicit drawing angles accordingly and bring it into a less hackish form - but I think this will come next year ;-) Well, I'm putting most of my work off to next year, too. Back again! I managed to describe the transformation in a more elegant way and the result looks (after initially rotating 1.5 degrees in the wrong direction!) very pleasing. What should be the next step? Shall I create a patch and send it to you, or should this go to rietveld? Should we wait for more opinions to come in? Marc ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
On 12/31/09 7:45 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: > Carl Sorensen schrieb: >> >> On 12/31/09 6:37 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: >> >> >>> Carl Sorensen schrieb: >>> On 12/30/09 7:42 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: > Carl Sorensen schrieb: > > OK, I've attached a 300 dpi png and with the clef rotated from 0 to 4 degrees. >>> Thanks for your work, Carl. >>> An Inkscape svg is available at http://www.et.byu.edu/~sorensen/cleftest.svg >>> OT: This is strange; in the browser, it looks ok, but with inkscape, the >>> staff lines are missing. >>> >> >> What version of inkscape are you using? Older versions didn't handle >> default colors according to the specification. I opened the file in my >> browser, and saved it, then opened it in inkscape, and everything was fine. >> > inkscape V 0.46. I did it via saving directly from your link, > and via saving through the browser, with identical results. I'm using 0.46-devel. >> >> Your opinions exactly match mine -- 1.5 or 2.0 with a slight shift of the >> bulb. But I think I prefer 1.5. >> > Ok, so I'll go for this. It isn't as easy as I thought, because I cannot > just rotate the whole picture, because the path is too complex for metafont. > So I'll have to transform every point and draw thereafter. It seems to > work, but > I have to change some explicit drawing angles accordingly and bring it into > a less hackish form - but I think this will come next year ;-) Well, I'm putting most of my work off to next year, too. > > Best wishes! > And to you! Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/31/09 6:37 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/30/09 7:42 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: Carl Sorensen schrieb: OK, I've attached a 300 dpi png and with the clef rotated from 0 to 4 degrees. Thanks for your work, Carl. An Inkscape svg is available at http://www.et.byu.edu/~sorensen/cleftest.svg OT: This is strange; in the browser, it looks ok, but with inkscape, the staff lines are missing. What version of inkscape are you using? Older versions didn't handle default colors according to the specification. I opened the file in my browser, and saved it, then opened it in inkscape, and everything was fine. inkscape V 0.46. I did it via saving directly from your link, and via saving through the browser, with identical results. But that's not important, because: A 600-dpi png is available at http://www.et.byu.edu/~sorensen/cleftest.png I printed this and stared at the clefs for quite a long time. I am not sure to use the 1.5 version as it is, or the 2.0 version with a tiny shift of the bulb to the right. But I tend to claim 1.5 being the best. Your opinions exactly match mine -- 1.5 or 2.0 with a slight shift of the bulb. But I think I prefer 1.5. Ok, so I'll go for this. It isn't as easy as I thought, because I cannot just rotate the whole picture, because the path is too complex for metafont. So I'll have to transform every point and draw thereafter. It seems to work, but I have to change some explicit drawing angles accordingly and bring it into a less hackish form - but I think this will come next year ;-) Best wishes! Marc Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
On 12/31/09 6:37 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: > Carl Sorensen schrieb: >> >> On 12/30/09 7:42 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: >> >> >>> Carl Sorensen schrieb: >>> >> >> OK, I've attached a 300 dpi png and with the clef rotated from 0 to 4 >> degrees. >> > Thanks for your work, Carl. >> An Inkscape svg is available at >> >> http://www.et.byu.edu/~sorensen/cleftest.svg >> > OT: This is strange; in the browser, it looks ok, but with inkscape, the > staff lines are missing. What version of inkscape are you using? Older versions didn't handle default colors according to the specification. I opened the file in my browser, and saved it, then opened it in inkscape, and everything was fine. > But that's not important, because: >> A 600-dpi png is available at >> >> http://www.et.byu.edu/~sorensen/cleftest.png >> > I printed this and stared at the clefs for quite a long time. I am not > sure to use the > 1.5 version as it is, or the 2.0 version with a tiny shift of the bulb > to the right. > But I tend to claim 1.5 being the best. Your opinions exactly match mine -- 1.5 or 2.0 with a slight shift of the bulb. But I think I prefer 1.5. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/30/09 7:42 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/30/09 6:06 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: @Carl: I am not at all familiar with SVG. Could you please produce a file similar to the one you sent already with different rotating angles? I can only produce a file like that with the clefs you have designed if you generate svg output instead of (or in addition to) the pdf output. Use lilypond -fsvg myfile.ly in order to generate svg output (see Command line options for lilypond in section 1.2 of Usage). Oh, sorry, I wasn't clear enough. I meant you to create this file with the original liypond clef. Then we can find the ideal rotating angle, and I'll implement that in metafont. OK, I've attached a 300 dpi png and with the clef rotated from 0 to 4 degrees. Thanks for your work, Carl. An Inkscape svg is available at http://www.et.byu.edu/~sorensen/cleftest.svg OT: This is strange; in the browser, it looks ok, but with inkscape, the staff lines are missing. But that's not important, because: A 600-dpi png is available at http://www.et.byu.edu/~sorensen/cleftest.png I printed this and stared at the clefs for quite a long time. I am not sure to use the 1.5 version as it is, or the 2.0 version with a tiny shift of the bulb to the right. But I tend to claim 1.5 being the best. I'll dive into the metafont sources to rotate the clef. Marc In reviewing these, I think a rotation of the whole clef by 1.5 degrees would look just about perfect. HTH, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/30/09 6:06 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: @Carl: I am not at all familiar with SVG. Could you please produce a file similar to the one you sent already with different rotating angles? I can only produce a file like that with the clefs you have designed if you generate svg output instead of (or in addition to) the pdf output. Use lilypond -fsvg myfile.ly in order to generate svg output (see Command line options for lilypond in section 1.2 of Usage). Oh, sorry, I wasn't clear enough. I meant you to create this file with the original liypond clef. Then we can find the ideal rotating angle, and I'll implement that in metafont. Thanks Marc ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
On 12/30/09 6:06 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: > > @Carl: > I am not at all familiar with SVG. Could you please produce a file > similar to the one you sent already with different rotating angles? I can only produce a file like that with the clefs you have designed if you generate svg output instead of (or in addition to) the pdf output. Use lilypond -fsvg myfile.ly in order to generate svg output (see Command line options for lilypond in section 1.2 of Usage). > > (By the way: it is interesting to compare the values: my first > rude approach was done with value 3; > Carl proposes 1.5 which yields to a rotating angle of 1.1 degrees; > Francisco votes for 2, this is 1.5 degrees; > so the range between 1 and about 1.7 degrees seems to be the > most interesting one). > And my first test suggested somewhere between 1 and 2.5 degrees of just pure rotation on the whole clef. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
Francisco Vila schrieb: 2009/12/29 Marc Hohl : I concatenated the pdfs to one file, which is too big for the list, so I put it on my website: http://www.hohlart.de/marc/gclef-slant.pdf I know that there is a spurious error on value 2, but I think that's not the main problem. Which value looks best? At a risk of being the "upper loop man" I have to say that starting from parameter=0 upwards, the upper loop grows continuously. If this is what you mean when you say this still has to be normalized, then forget me. Yes, I wanted the loop to be corrected at step 3 ;-) The width of the vertical seems to be thinner starting at 4. Several things change at once in the sequence, but my amateurish vote is for 2 even when it has the error, because it is between 1.5 and 2.5 which I like less. Taking into account the other/earlier responses from David and Carl, I now think that the three-step plan is wrong, because it first destroys the existing balance to try to mend it later again. @Carl: I am not at all familiar with SVG. Could you please produce a file similar to the one you sent already with different rotating angles? (By the way: it is interesting to compare the values: my first rude approach was done with value 3; Carl proposes 1.5 which yields to a rotating angle of 1.1 degrees; Francisco votes for 2, this is 1.5 degrees; so the range between 1 and about 1.7 degrees seems to be the most interesting one). Then, if we have a decision about the "right" rotating angle, I think I can implement this in metafont. A small correction of the bulb will probably be needed afterwards, but this should not be too difficult, and once I got the right rotation amount, I can generate comparison tests like my first one with different bulbs. I wanted to create a real life example to see the clef in its natural environment, but in addition, I will cutout the clefs and collect them onto a png file for better one-to-one comparison, once the rotation is fixed. Thanks for your resposes! Greetings Marc ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
On 12/29/09 1:54 PM, "Marc Hohl" wrote: > Marc Hohl schrieb: >> Francisco Vila schrieb: >>> Just to add a bit to the brainstorming: >>> >>> The uppermost lace of our G-clef already was slightly oversized. >>> I cannot explain why, but latest proposals I've seen are getting it >>> even greater. >>> >>> Anyone appreciates the same? >>> >> Well spotted. I was not sure whether this is kind of an optical illusion, >> but I think there are some side effects, caused by (hidden) depencies >> of the variables which describe the outline of the clef. >> >> I'll investigate further. > I decided to start from scratch, because tuning a little bit here and there > seems not to be the best strategy. > > Being aware that there may be some nonlinearities, I would like to follow > these items: > > 1) finding an optimal angle for the "spine" > 2) adapting the lower bulb > 3) adjusting the upper "loop" In response to Jan's earlier question, I rotated the whole clef, not just the spine. IIUC, rotating the spine makes the upper loop larger and unbalances the split of the lower loop caused by the spine. Perhaps we ought to consider just rotating the whole clef. I find it very hard to compare the clefs on different pages. I realize that it's too late for this test, but in the future, if you make your output in SVG format, then we can copy clefs from one document to the other and get a good side-by-side comparision. > > (perhaps 2 and 3 should go together for overall balance, and finally, 1 > should be adapted to the results of 2 and 3, but ...) > > So I created a batch script which adds 0, 0.5, 1, ... 5 (in arbitrary units) > to the x coordinate of the "spine vector" (which will then be normalized > anyway, > so the only thing that's changing is the angle) in the metafont sources, > compiles the feta font from scratch and uses this new font to typeset an > example. This took quite a long time (approximately about 75% of the > time my daughter needed to watch "twilight" on the same machine while > metafont was bleeding...) > > I concatenated the pdfs to one file, which is too big for the list, so I > put it on my website: > > http://www.hohlart.de/marc/gclef-slant.pdf > > I know that there is a spurious error on value 2, but I think that's not the > main problem. Which value looks best? I think I prefer 1.5. Thanks for all this work! Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
2009/12/29 Marc Hohl : > I concatenated the pdfs to one file, which is too big for the list, so I > put it on my website: > > http://www.hohlart.de/marc/gclef-slant.pdf > > I know that there is a spurious error on value 2, but I think that's not the > main problem. Which value looks best? At a risk of being the "upper loop man" I have to say that starting from parameter=0 upwards, the upper loop grows continuously. If this is what you mean when you say this still has to be normalized, then forget me. The width of the vertical seems to be thinner starting at 4. Several things change at once in the sequence, but my amateurish vote is for 2 even when it has the error, because it is between 1.5 and 2.5 which I like less. -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com No le des el mando a distancia a Microsoft. No utilices Windows 7. http://windows7sins.org ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
Marc Hohl schrieb: Francisco Vila schrieb: Just to add a bit to the brainstorming: The uppermost lace of our G-clef already was slightly oversized. I cannot explain why, but latest proposals I've seen are getting it even greater. Anyone appreciates the same? Well spotted. I was not sure whether this is kind of an optical illusion, but I think there are some side effects, caused by (hidden) depencies of the variables which describe the outline of the clef. I'll investigate further. I decided to start from scratch, because tuning a little bit here and there seems not to be the best strategy. Being aware that there may be some nonlinearities, I would like to follow these items: 1) finding an optimal angle for the "spine" 2) adapting the lower bulb 3) adjusting the upper "loop" (perhaps 2 and 3 should go together for overall balance, and finally, 1 should be adapted to the results of 2 and 3, but ...) So I created a batch script which adds 0, 0.5, 1, ... 5 (in arbitrary units) to the x coordinate of the "spine vector" (which will then be normalized anyway, so the only thing that's changing is the angle) in the metafont sources, compiles the feta font from scratch and uses this new font to typeset an example. This took quite a long time (approximately about 75% of the time my daughter needed to watch "twilight" on the same machine while metafont was bleeding...) I concatenated the pdfs to one file, which is too big for the list, so I put it on my website: http://www.hohlart.de/marc/gclef-slant.pdf I know that there is a spurious error on value 2, but I think that's not the main problem. Which value looks best? Greetings Marc Merry christmas! Marc ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
