Re: LP's staff lines are thinner than Henle...
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 02:07:35PM -0800, Mark Polesky wrote: > I'm intentionally making a big deal out of this because this > is the text on page 2 of the manual, and disingenuous claims > are off-putting to new users. We're trying to "sell" a > product, but our pitch is unconvincing and maybe a little > suspicious. Thanks for looking into this. My initial thought is that we should print out our flat (at 4800dpi or whatever), then scan that printout. This would avoid any pdf->png confusion, as well as presenting a more unified comparison. (well, it would if we could print it on the same paper as the Henle and Barenreiter flats used) However -- and I really hate asking people to delay things when they're enthusiastic -- could you wait a few weeks until GOP starts? With Christmas and preparing for 2.12, this isn't the best of times to fiddle with such details. In addition, the entire Engraving essay will be removed from the LM, put somewhere else, and quite possibly be rewritten from scratch as part of GOP. (that said, we will probably retain the comparison of flats, so perhaps there's no point waiting before producing the scans) Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: LP's staff lines are thinner than Henle...
Years ago I made a 4800dpi film in a printshop. It was surprisingly different than a 600dpi laser-print. So to make a fair comparison one should print pages with the same professional technology and see. Bert Carl D. Sorensen wrote: On 12/14/08 11:45 PM, "Mark Polesky" wrote: LM 1.1 Background - "Engraving" states: "our staff lines... are also much thicker than lines in the computer edition." In both the HTML and PDF versions, LilyPond's staff lines are in fact the thinnest when compared. I've included a png to make this easier to see. In the HTML version, the distance from top to bottom staff line of the LP example was smaller than the other 2, but even when scaling the LP example to match the other 2 (as I've done here) the LP lines are still the thinnest. The PDF example is magnified about 300 times. Can someone explain this? - Mark The staff lines on your other examples have been broadened by anti-aliasing. The staff line on the LilyPond example have not been, because it's a vector drawing. So your comparision is not apt. I have not viewed the originals to make any judgement of them. Carl ___ 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
Re: LP's staff lines are thinner than Henle...
On 12/14/08 11:45 PM, "Mark Polesky" wrote: > LM 1.1 Background - "Engraving" states: > > "our staff lines... are also > much thicker than lines in the > computer edition." > > In both the HTML and PDF versions, LilyPond's staff lines are > in fact the thinnest when compared. I've included a png to > make this easier to see. In the HTML version, the distance > from top to bottom staff line of the LP example was smaller > than the other 2, but even when scaling the LP example to > match the other 2 (as I've done here) the LP lines are still > the thinnest. The PDF example is magnified about 300 times. > > Can someone explain this? > > - Mark > > > > The staff lines on your other examples have been broadened by anti-aliasing. The staff line on the LilyPond example have not been, because it's a vector drawing. So your comparision is not apt. I have not viewed the originals to make any judgement of them. Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
LP's staff lines are thinner than Henle...
LM 1.1 Background - "Engraving" states: "our staff lines... are also much thicker than lines in the computer edition." In both the HTML and PDF versions, LilyPond's staff lines are in fact the thinnest when compared. I've included a png to make this easier to see. In the HTML version, the distance from top to bottom staff line of the LP example was smaller than the other 2, but even when scaling the LP example to match the other 2 (as I've done here) the LP lines are still the thinnest. The PDF example is magnified about 300 times. Can someone explain this? - Mark <>___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
