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 1/1/10 2:52 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de 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: On 1/1/10 2:52 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de 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 4:08 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys hanw...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de 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 9:18 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu 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]
Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/30/09 7:42 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/30/09 6:06 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de 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]
Francisco Vila schrieb: 2009/12/29 Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de: 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 12/30/09 6:06 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de 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]
Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/30/09 6:06 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de 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
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
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
2009/12/29 Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de: 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
Re: G clef changes [was: Re: Alternative music font]
On 12/29/09 1:54 PM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de 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: Alternative music font
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. Merry christmas! Marc ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de writes: Carl Sorensen schrieb: Looks good to me. I'd also like to see half-way between this attempt and the first attempt, not because I think this is wrong, but because I tend to find optimum settings by finding not enough and too much and going between those two. Here you are! If you cast this clef from iron and put it on a flat surface, it will fall over to the right. The low bowl is now moved to the left into a position of imbalance. The spine is more or less only straightened in its lower part. I have the feeling that the bottom of the bowl should be a bit more to the right, maybe it needs to be narrower. Possibly straightening the spine should not be mostly done at the bottom, but a bit more symmetrically. If spine and bowl are connected by a hinge at the top of the clef, the overall construct should be more or less in (visual) equilibrium, with neither the spine part nor the suspended bowl part falling to the left or right. In other words: I have the feeling that the current changes are about balancing the total of two imbalanced parts, where the parts themselves may need a bit of care. I am no font designer, so please don't take this as any qualified analysis. If it inspires you to try something for which you like the overall result better, that's fine. If not, that's fine too. It's just a bit of brainstorming, not more. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
On 12/23/09 12:41 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/22/09 12:45 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/21/09 1:52 PM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: [...] I like it much better. But I think that the bulb on the bottom of the clef needs to shift slightly to the right with this change. Like the attached one? You may use the pdf file for a printout. This may be a bit too much different, or maybe it's just the change in the curvature that bothers me a bit. It feels like the curve at the bottom of the clef is too pointed somehow. Perhaps it's the transition that I'm responding to; I'm not really sure. Perhaps I overdid it a bit; here is a version where the bulb is exaclty half-way between the first and the second attempt. Looks good to me. I'd also like to see half-way between this attempt and the first attempt, not because I think this is wrong, but because I tend to find optimum settings by finding not enough and too much and going between those two. Here you are! Having reviewed all four of the clefs, I think I like 3 the best, but I have a hard time deciding between 3 and 4. Either of them seems fine to me. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
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? -- 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
Re: Alternative music font
On 12/22/09 12:45 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: Carl Sorensen schrieb: On 12/21/09 1:52 PM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: [...] I like it much better. But I think that the bulb on the bottom of the clef needs to shift slightly to the right with this change. Like the attached one? You may use the pdf file for a printout. This may be a bit too much different, or maybe it's just the change in the curvature that bothers me a bit. It feels like the curve at the bottom of the clef is too pointed somehow. Perhaps it's the transition that I'm responding to; I'm not really sure. Perhaps I overdid it a bit; here is a version where the bulb is exaclty half-way between the first and the second attempt. Looks good to me. I'd also like to see half-way between this attempt and the first attempt, not because I think this is wrong, but because I tend to find optimum settings by finding not enough and too much and going between those two. But I'm not a great source for making aesthetic decisions. I'm an engineer, after all! Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
Carl Sorensen schrieb: Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-list at xs4all.nl writes: Op maandag 19-10-2009 om 15:33 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Simon Tatham: It's interesting that you should mention that: that actually reminds me of one of my specific issues with Feta, namely that the curved centre line of its treble clef _does_ make it look to me as if it's leaning over backwards. Gonville's straight-backed version feels much more balanced to me. That would be a bug. How many degrees would you need to rotate it to get it straight, in your opinion? Thanks to the great work on the SVG backend, I was able to do a test. I rotated the clef by 1, 2.5, and 5 degrees. Surprisingly, I could see small differences. I'd think somewhere between 1 and 2.5 degrees would be about right. I like the 2.5 degrees best at the top of the clef, but I think the tail needs to be adjusted a little bit to look right at 2.5 degrees. Even the 1 degree rotation appears better balanced IMO. Hello Carl, I played a bit with the mf sources, and changing dowstroke_dir from unitvector (14,-75) to (11,-75) seems to be a good choice, what do you think? Marc Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel inline: clef_comparison.png___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: It's interesting that you should mention that: that actually reminds me of one of my specific issues with Feta, namely that the curved centre line of its treble clef _does_ make it look to me as if it's leaning over backwards. Gonville's straight-backed version feels much more balanced to me. That would be a bug. How many degrees would you need to rotate it to get it straight, in your opinion? Thanks to the great work on the SVG backend, I was able to do a test. I rotated the clef by 1, 2.5, and 5 degrees. Surprisingly, I could see small differences. I'd think somewhere between 1 and 2.5 degrees would be about right. I like the 2.5 degrees best at the top of the clef, but I think the tail needs to be adjusted a little bit to look right at 2.5 degrees. Even the 1 degree rotation appears better balanced IMO. Hello Carl, I played a bit with the mf sources, and changing dowstroke_dir from unitvector (14,-75) to (11,-75) seems to be a good choice, what do you think? Before this is committed, please print at 1200dpi and check that this looks good on paper too. Marc Thanks, 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 -- 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: Alternative music font
On 12/21/09 3:08 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: Carl Sorensen schrieb: Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-list at xs4all.nl writes: Op maandag 19-10-2009 om 15:33 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Simon Tatham: It's interesting that you should mention that: that actually reminds me of one of my specific issues with Feta, namely that the curved centre line of its treble clef _does_ make it look to me as if it's leaning over backwards. Gonville's straight-backed version feels much more balanced to me. That would be a bug. How many degrees would you need to rotate it to get it straight, in your opinion? Thanks to the great work on the SVG backend, I was able to do a test. I rotated the clef by 1, 2.5, and 5 degrees. Surprisingly, I could see small differences. I'd think somewhere between 1 and 2.5 degrees would be about right. I like the 2.5 degrees best at the top of the clef, but I think the tail needs to be adjusted a little bit to look right at 2.5 degrees. Even the 1 degree rotation appears better balanced IMO. Hello Carl, I played a bit with the mf sources, and changing dowstroke_dir from unitvector (14,-75) to (11,-75) seems to be a good choice, what do you think? I like it much better. But I think that the bulb on the bottom of the clef needs to shift slightly to the right with this change. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
On 12/21/09 1:52 PM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: [...] I like it much better. But I think that the bulb on the bottom of the clef needs to shift slightly to the right with this change. Like the attached one? You may use the pdf file for a printout. This may be a bit too much different, or maybe it's just the change in the curvature that bothers me a bit. It feels like the curve at the bottom of the clef is too pointed somehow. Perhaps it's the transition that I'm responding to; I'm not really sure. Thanks for working on this. Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote: It's interesting that you should mention that: that actually reminds me of one of my specific issues with Feta, namely that the curved centre line of its treble clef _does_ make it look to me as if it's leaning over backwards. Gonville's straight-backed version feels much more balanced to me. That would be a bug. How many degrees would you need to rotate it to get it straight, in your opinion? Thanks to the great work on the SVG backend, I was able to do a test. I rotated the clef by 1, 2.5, and 5 degrees. Surprisingly, I could see small differences. I'd think somewhere between 1 and 2.5 degrees would be about right. I like the 2.5 degrees best at the top of the clef, but I think the tail needs to be adjusted a little bit to look right at 2.5 degrees. Even the 1 degree rotation appears better balanced IMO. Good spotting! We might also be able to fix things by moving the intersection (where the 2 lines and the staff line) come together and the bulb slightly to the right. -- 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: Alternative music font
On 2009-10-28, Patrick McCarty wrote: On 2009-10-28, Patrick McCarty wrote: On 2009-10-28, Neil Puttock wrote: 2009/10/20 Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com: 2009/10/20 Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com: This should be fixed now in latest git. Works for me. I guess I spoke a bit prematurely here, since the fix you pushed always loads aybabtu, even when font-defaults has been redefined. I've tried amending the code to allow switching to gonville-brace, but it still doesn't work properly. It seems that select_font () always selects the default font for fetaBraces (or the first entry in the node). Changing font-defaults to #(define font-defaults '((font-family . gonville) (font-encoding . fetaBraces))) only loads gonville-brace, and not gonville. So we need to override both encodings. I'm not entirely sure how to do that, but I'll look at it shortly. This isn't entirely true, now that I look at it again. In this case, gonville, gonville-brace, and aybabtu are all loaded, but aybabtu is used for the braces. Hi Neil, Can you see if the brace issue is fixed in latest git? The problem with \numericTimeSignature and the like is more complicated, but I'll try to look at it soon. Thanks, Patrick ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
2009/10/29 Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com: This isn't entirely true, now that I look at it again. In this case, gonville, gonville-brace, and aybabtu are all loaded, but aybabtu is used for the braces. Thanks for fixing this, Patrick; now I can compare and contrast the ugliness of the braces at large point sizes. :) Are you sure about the extra font-defaults setting? It seems to overshadow the default for fetaMusic, resulting in failure to look up noteheads and clefs. Also, I checked \numericTimeSignature, and that's broken with gonville. Dynamics don't work either. Would this be related to the way feta-alphabet is loaded using Pango? Regards, Neil ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
2009/11/1 Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com: On 2009-11-01, Neil Puttock wrote: This is what I saw before reversing the settings (my latest commit), and now everything loads fine for me. Same here, but I can't see why you need to set font-defaults twice; surely the first setting is ignored? Regards, Neil ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
On 2009-11-01, Neil Puttock wrote: 2009/11/1 Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com: On 2009-11-01, Neil Puttock wrote: This is what I saw before reversing the settings (my latest commit), and now everything loads fine for me. Same here, but I can't see why you need to set font-defaults twice; surely the first setting is ignored? :-) You're right. The fetaBraces override was necessary when I first tried to fix the issue, but not anymore. Fixed in git. Thanks, Patrick ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
2009/10/20 Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com: 2009/10/20 Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com: This should be fixed now in latest git. Works for me. I guess I spoke a bit prematurely here, since the fix you pushed always loads aybabtu, even when font-defaults has been redefined. I've tried amending the code to allow switching to gonville-brace, but it still doesn't work properly. It seems that select_font () always selects the default font for fetaBraces (or the first entry in the node). Regards, Neil ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
On 2009-10-28, Neil Puttock wrote: 2009/10/20 Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com: 2009/10/20 Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com: This should be fixed now in latest git. Works for me. I guess I spoke a bit prematurely here, since the fix you pushed always loads aybabtu, even when font-defaults has been redefined. I've tried amending the code to allow switching to gonville-brace, but it still doesn't work properly. It seems that select_font () always selects the default font for fetaBraces (or the first entry in the node). Hi Neil, Thanks for noticing this. It's a rather complicated problem involving the font tree, as you pointed out. Changing font-defaults to #(define font-defaults '((font-family . gonville) (font-encoding . fetaBraces))) only loads gonville-brace, and not gonville. So we need to override both encodings. I'm not entirely sure how to do that, but I'll look at it shortly. -Patrick ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
On 2009-10-28, Patrick McCarty wrote: On 2009-10-28, Neil Puttock wrote: 2009/10/20 Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com: 2009/10/20 Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com: This should be fixed now in latest git. Works for me. I guess I spoke a bit prematurely here, since the fix you pushed always loads aybabtu, even when font-defaults has been redefined. I've tried amending the code to allow switching to gonville-brace, but it still doesn't work properly. It seems that select_font () always selects the default font for fetaBraces (or the first entry in the node). Changing font-defaults to #(define font-defaults '((font-family . gonville) (font-encoding . fetaBraces))) only loads gonville-brace, and not gonville. So we need to override both encodings. I'm not entirely sure how to do that, but I'll look at it shortly. This isn't entirely true, now that I look at it again. In this case, gonville, gonville-brace, and aybabtu are all loaded, but aybabtu is used for the braces. Also, I checked \numericTimeSignature, and that's broken with gonville. -Patrick ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) lilypondt...@organum.hu wrote: Wow too. Actually, there are things in Feta what I don't feel natural either. For example: the caesura sign, the G-clef and the trill indication feels better for me in Gonville. Though the G-clef is I think a clear LilyPond watermark, so I would keep that one :) I am to blame for curve in the downstroke of the clef, and I am not satisfied with it either. We had a straight version at some point, but I gave up on it, because I couldnt get the transition at the bottom crook from straight to curve correct, also I liked the somewhat swingy feel of the curved downstroke, but I agree it could be less curvy. -- 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: Alternative music font
Op maandag 19-10-2009 om 20:49 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Jan Nieuwenhuizen: Hi Simon, Op maandag 19-10-2009 om 15:33 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Simon Tatham: Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: All I'd suggest is trivial changes to Lilypond to make it easy to use an alternative font, and at least not actually _deny_ that such a thing exists. (E.g. the documentation for ly:system-font-load currently says that only Emmentaler and Aybabtu contain the necessary LILC, LILF and LILY tables, which is now out of date :-) Good idea, send a patch :-) This turned out to be even easier than I thought. In the end, we /did/ do a good job on the font selection scheme, so it seems. See http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=commitdiff;h=c56ba7b4abd3b27e96367ea04b37f2e1d3b77663 However, this [from your README.dev] Generating the font files - To generate the full Gonville font in a Lilypond-ready form, run ./glyphs.py -lily This takes about half an hour on my 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, is a bit problematic. We do not want to ship font binaries, but I suppose we also do not want to add half an hour build time. I guess you feel the same: it would really be nice if you found a way to reduce the font build time :-) HTH, Greetings, Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter Avatar®: http://AvatarAcademy.nl| http://lilypond.org ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: is a bit problematic. We do not want to ship font binaries, but I suppose we also do not want to add half an hour build time. I guess you feel the same: it would really be nice if you found a way to reduce the font build time :-) Absolutely! The half hour is an utter pain for me too, of course. The current rendering scheme is the simplest one I could think up in terms of development time: I generate trivial Postscript describing a lot of overlapping nib shapes moving round the curves, call Ghostscript to render to a bitmap, then call potrace to convert back into outlines. Some rough-and-ready timing measurements suggest that Ghostscript is the major consumer of CPU time in this process; my guess is that it ought to be possible to write a much more efficient rasteriser if I know it's only going to have to deal with a tiny subset of the full PS rendering model. I've half thought out a much more ambitious approach that doesn't go through a physical bitmap at any point (and hence ought to improve the quality of the output outlines too, due to losing the resolution bottleneck), but I haven't yet worked out whether it's too ambitious to be feasible, or indeed too ambitious for me to have time to try it :-) Cheers, Simon -- Simon Tatham What do we want?ROT13! ana...@pobox.com When do we want it? ABJ! ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
2009/10/20 Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl: See http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=commitdiff;h=c56ba7b4abd3b27e96367ea04b37f2e1d3b77663 After this change, piano braces do not work. Would it require a complete font build? Drawing systems.../usr/local/share/lilypond/2.13.6/scm/font.scm:167:29: In procedure string-replace in expression (string-replace emmentaler-brace aybabtu ...): /usr/local/share/lilypond/2.13.6/scm/font.scm:167:29: Wrong type (expecting exact integer): emmentaler-brace -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
On 2009-10-20, Francisco Vila wrote: 2009/10/20 Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl: See http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=commitdiff;h=c56ba7b4abd3b27e96367ea04b37f2e1d3b77663 After this change, piano braces do not work. Would it require a complete font build? Drawing systems.../usr/local/share/lilypond/2.13.6/scm/font.scm:167:29: In procedure string-replace in expression (string-replace emmentaler-brace aybabtu ...): /usr/local/share/lilypond/2.13.6/scm/font.scm:167:29: Wrong type (expecting exact integer): emmentaler-brace This should be fixed now in latest git. Thanks, Patrick ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
2009/10/20 Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com: This should be fixed now in latest git. Works for me. One little niggle remains: there are two grobs with font-family set to 'music (AmbitusAccidental and Clef), which means they ignore the font-family change unless it's explicitly set (i.e., \override Staff.Clef #'font-family = #'gonville). I can't see any problem with removing these default settings from define-grobs.scm. Regards, Neil ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
Op dinsdag 20-10-2009 om 09:47 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Patrick McCarty: On 2009-10-20, Francisco Vila wrote: 2009/10/20 Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl: Drawing systems.../usr/local/share/lilypond/2.13.6/scm/font.scm:167:29: In procedure string-replace in expression (string-replace emmentaler-brace aybabtu ...): /usr/local/share/lilypond/2.13.6/scm/font.scm:167:29: Wrong type (expecting exact integer): emmentaler-brace Oops, and This should be fixed now in latest git. Thanks! Jan -- who's a great believer of: did not test == does not work ;-) -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter Avatar®: http://AvatarAcademy.nl| http://lilypond.org ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
Op dinsdag 20-10-2009 om 14:58 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Simon Tatham: Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: I generate trivial Postscript describing a lot of overlapping nib shapes moving round the curves, call Ghostscript to render to a bitmap Ah, I see. Ghostscript is the major consumer of CPU time in this process If that is so, would it be feasible (and would it help?) to have ghostscript render multiple glyphs in one go? Is forking/startup time a factor? I've half thought out a much more ambitious approach that doesn't go through a physical bitmap at any point (and hence ought to improve the quality of the output outlines too, due to losing the resolution bottleneck), but I haven't yet worked out whether it's too ambitious to be feasible, or indeed too ambitious for me to have time to try it :-) It seems to me that your approach could me more attractive than using metafont/metapost. What is the reason you did not use plain metapost input? Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter Avatar®: http://AvatarAcademy.nl| http://lilypond.org ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
Op maandag 19-10-2009 om 08:15 uur [tijdzone +], schreef Simon Tatham: Hi Simon, I've recently drawn a new font of musical symbols for use with Lilypond, which look more like the ones I'm used to and hence distract me less. I put it up on the web this weekend at http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/ Wow. You created a full font? That must have taken quite some time! I think Feta took Han-Wen and me something between one and two man-years of work. Reading what you write on your site I designed it because Lilypond's standard font (Feta) was not to my taste: I found it to be (variously) over-ornate, strangely proportioned, and subtly not like the music I was used to reading. Music set in Feta looks to me like strangely stylised music; music set in Gonville just looks to me like music, so I can read it without being distracted so much. I feel a bit disappointed because one of my goals was to create a font that would look like the most beautiful music that I have seen. As one of our explicit goals for LilyPond is for the printed music /not/ to distract the player, we evidently failed to achieve this for you. Looking at Gonville it's not so difficult to imagine for me how this could be, as I cannot remember ever having seen music that looks much like it. For example, the up-flags are much fatter and rounder/shorter than the down flags, is that intentional? What is the status of the font, is it ready for general use, is it finished? Up till now we have been advertising Feta as being the lilypond font and describing it mostly with general terms as beautiful and designed after the best typesetting traditions. In some places, possibly the essay and talks, we elaborated on the fatness, eg see the short note of font design at http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/typography-features Now that you created a second working font for Lily, it would be nice if both fonts were [more explicitly] advertised as to what they were designed after. The LilyPond font sources contain quite a few citings of sources of inspiration, eg % Couldn't find many z examples. This one is losely inspired % by a sfz from Mueller Etuden fuer Horn (Edition Hofmeister). % Inspired by Adobe Sonata and [Wanske]. % For example, see POSTSCRIPT Language -- program design, % page 119, and [Wanske], p 41, 42. % [Wanske] says the bulbs should be positioned about 1/4 right of the % `arrow'. % [Wanske] and some Baerenreiter editions % suggest about 80 degrees instead of a half-circle % Inspired by a (by now) PD edition of Durand C'ie edition of % Saint-Saens' Celloconcerto no. 1 % For example, the 8th rest was vaguely based on a book with trumpet % studies by Duhem, and by Baerenreiters cello suites. I included my % findings in a comment in the mf file. One of the things that I tried % to do was make the rest a little lighter and narrower than the black % note head. I think this looks better in polyphonic music, when the % rest is below a head from a different voice. % inspired by Bamberger Manuscript (15th century), in: % MGG, volume 2, table 59. A somewhat better way than beautiful to describe Feta could be something like the design is inspired by fonts used in traditional manual engravings publish by European music publishers in/towards the end of the first half of the 20th century [Baerenreiter, Duhem, Durand, Hofmeister, Peters, Schott]. This is sometimes regarded as the peak of traditional musical engraving practice [Hader, Wanske], [in http://lilypond.org/web/images/FISL7-slides.pdf we call it our Gold standard] [??] Annotations can be found in the font's source code. Criteria for the choice of inspirational glyphs are blackness or boldness. In contrast: computer-made often looks very white. Delicacy or roundness. No outer corners of glyphs should have sharp edges, as the eye tends to stick to those points. Finally commonness or familiarness. A glyph should not look suprisingly unique. Further, common [text-]font considerations were taken into account. For example, a glyph should look balanced out. It should not lean backward of forward, inviting the reader to catch it before it falls over :-) There should also be a black/white balance. It should still look good printed in a long row. It should look good on screen as well as on paper [quite different from a computer screen, sometimes]. Curves should be smooth, have no discontinuities. What would a more explicit description of Gonville be? It would be nice if you could describe the criteria and sources of your inspiration, as opposed to contrasting it to Feta's apparent failure to meet those :-) Do you intend to have Gonville included in LilyPond? In that case it would be good if you had a [few] high resolution scans of music that Gonville strives to mimic. Is
Re: Alternative music font
Op maandag 19-10-2009 om 15:05 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Simon Tatham: (I hope this reply to the list works. I think not, you'll have to subscribe. I had to post my previous message through the Gmane interface, but if I have to post this one the same way, I won't be able to get the In-Reply-To header to work properly.) Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Wow. You created a full font? That must have taken quite some time! I think Feta took Han-Wen and me something between one and two man-years of work. This one has only taken me a couple of months (including some initial thought about how to get nice-looking curves without an excessive amount of manual specification). But then, it's very likely that a lot of yours is better thought out in many ways that I didn't pay much attention to. (Just for a start, I haven't implemented your subtle variation between the different point sizes, except in the braces.) I feel a bit disappointed because one of my goals was to create a font that would look like the most beautiful music that I have seen. As one of our explicit goals for LilyPond is for the printed music /not/ to distract the player, we evidently failed to achieve this for you. I'm afraid so, but then, it doesn't seem surprising to me that one answer doesn't satisfy everybody's tastes! I don't think you have any call to feel disappointed at not having managed to please absolutely everybody. Looking at Gonville it's not so difficult to imagine for me how this could be, as I cannot remember ever having seen music that looks much like it. For example, the up-flags are much fatter and rounder/shorter than the down flags, is that intentional? I may yet make another attempt at redesigning the multiple flags. The intention was to have them all essentially similar in shape (unlike, say, Feta's quadruple down-flag in which the four flags look very different from each other) and bold enough to make it easy to see how many of them there were. They're all currently 'the same thickness' in the sense that every flag covers the same vertical length of stem where it joins on to it; that's something that I may re-think later on in favour of a more subjective idea of 'sameness', because I've already had one mild criticism of it. What is the status of the font, is it ready for general use, is it finished? Initial development is complete. I may make changes, but probably not until I've collected some feedback and got a general idea of what really does want changing and what's a silly idea I've accidentally talked myself into by thinking too hard about it... Up till now we have been advertising Feta as being the lilypond font and describing it mostly with general terms as beautiful and designed after the best typesetting traditions. In some places, possibly the essay and talks, we elaborated on the fatness, eg see the short note of font design at http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/typography-features One comment from a friend about the difference between the two fonts was that a thing he liked about Gonville was that it looked more modern. Feta certainly seems to be striving after a 'traditional' look, and perhaps that's precisely what is not to everyone's taste (one person's 'traditional' is another's 'old-fashioned' :-). Now that you created a second working font for Lily, it would be nice if both fonts were [more explicitly] advertised as to what they were designed after. The LilyPond font sources contain quite a few citings of sources of inspiration, eg [...] Sadly I don't have anything like that sort of detailed citation available. I grew up playing the violin, and in designing Gonville I was trying to recall the look of the sheet music I was provided with by my teachers, because that was what I was used to reading; unfortunately, I don't have most of that sheet music any more, so all I can give is vague generalities. Ultimately, my design criterion was that it should satisfy my personal subjective aesthetic criteria. Feedback so far suggests that at least a few other people's criteria are not too far off mine, but I don't think I could really give a scholarly analysis of where mine came from. Further, common [text-]font considerations were taken into account. For example, a glyph should look balanced out. It should not lean backward of forward, inviting the reader to catch it before it falls over :-) It's interesting that you should mention that: that actually reminds me of one of my specific issues with Feta, namely that the curved centre line of its treble clef _does_ make it look to me as if it's leaning over backwards. Gonville's straight-backed version feels much more balanced to me. Do you intend to have Gonville included in LilyPond? You'd be welcome to include it if you wanted to, but I hadn't particularly
Re: Alternative music font
Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Wow. You created a full font? That must have taken quite some time! I think Feta took Han-Wen and me something between one and two man-years of work. This one has only taken me a couple of months (including some initial thought about how to get nice-looking curves without an excessive amount of manual specification). But then, it's very likely that a lot of yours is better thought out in many ways that I didn't pay much attention to. (Just for a start, I haven't implemented your subtle variation between the different point sizes, except in the braces.) I feel a bit disappointed because one of my goals was to create a font that would look like the most beautiful music that I have seen. As one of our explicit goals for LilyPond is for the printed music /not/ to distract the player, we evidently failed to achieve this for you. I'm afraid so, but then, it doesn't seem surprising to me that one answer doesn't satisfy everybody's tastes! I don't think you have any call to feel disappointed at not having managed to please absolutely everybody. Looking at Gonville it's not so difficult to imagine for me how this could be, as I cannot remember ever having seen music that looks much like it. For example, the up-flags are much fatter and rounder/shorter than the down flags, is that intentional? I may yet make another attempt at redesigning the multiple flags. The intention was to have them all essentially similar in shape (unlike, say, Feta's quadruple down-flag in which the four flags look very different from each other) and bold enough to make it easy to see how many of them there were. They're all currently 'the same thickness' in the sense that every flag covers the same vertical length of stem where it joins on to it; that's something that I may re-think later on in favour of a more subjective idea of 'sameness', because I've already had one mild criticism of it. What is the status of the font, is it ready for general use, is it finished? Initial development is complete. I may make changes, but probably not until I've collected some feedback and got a general idea of what really does want changing and what's a silly idea I've accidentally talked myself into by thinking too hard about it... Up till now we have been advertising Feta as being the lilypond font and describing it mostly with general terms as beautiful and designed after the best typesetting traditions. In some places, possibly the essay and talks, we elaborated on the fatness, eg see the short note of font design at http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/typography-features One comment from a friend about the difference between the two fonts was that a thing he liked about Gonville was that it looked more modern. Feta certainly seems to be striving after a 'traditional' look, and perhaps that's precisely what is not to everyone's taste (one person's 'traditional' is another's 'old-fashioned' :-). Now that you created a second working font for Lily, it would be nice if both fonts were [more explicitly] advertised as to what they were designed after. The LilyPond font sources contain quite a few citings of sources of inspiration, eg [...] Sadly I don't have anything like that sort of detailed citation available. I grew up playing the violin, and in designing Gonville I was trying to recall the look of the sheet music I was provided with by my teachers, because that was what I was used to reading; unfortunately, I don't have most of that sheet music any more, so all I can give is vague generalities. Ultimately, my design criterion was that it should satisfy my personal subjective aesthetic criteria. Feedback so far suggests that at least a few other people's criteria are not too far off mine, but I don't think I could really give a scholarly analysis of where mine came from. Further, common [text-]font considerations were taken into account. For example, a glyph should look balanced out. It should not lean backward of forward, inviting the reader to catch it before it falls over :-) It's interesting that you should mention that: that actually reminds me of one of my specific issues with Feta, namely that the curved centre line of its treble clef _does_ make it look to me as if it's leaning over backwards. Gonville's straight-backed version feels much more balanced to me. Do you intend to have Gonville included in LilyPond? You'd be welcome to include it if you wanted to, but I hadn't particularly expected that you would - I was under no illusions that you'd instantly prefer it to the font you've carefully tuned to the criteria you consider important! I'm perfectly happy to maintain it as a third-party accessory, and keep it up to date as necessary. I don't even ask for a link from the website, if you don't think Gonville is of sufficiently high quality to merit it. All I'd suggest is trivial changes to Lilypond to make
Re: Alternative music font
Hi all, Although I greatly prefer the Feta font to Gonville, I'm very much enjoying this thread — kudos to Simon and Jan for all their hard and considered work! it doesn't seem surprising to me that one answer doesn't satisfy everybody's tastes! Agreed — this is one of the great(est) benefits of open source software. In that spirit, I know that many people out there would love a font which looks handwritten — maybe once Gonville is integrated, you (Simon) could provide an API documentation patch, so that others might contribute/integrate their alternative fonts? One comment from a friend about the difference between the two fonts was that a thing he liked about Gonville was that it looked more modern. As you said, this will be a matter of taste — I much prefer the more traditional look of Feta to anything out there (Gonville or Igor Engraver's font or Finale's or Sibelius's or...). Of course, I also maintain that number theory reached its apex sometime between Fermat and Euler, so take that as you may... ;) It's interesting that you should mention that: that actually reminds me of one of my specific issues with Feta, namely that the curved centre line of its treble clef _does_ make it look to me as if it's leaning over backwards. Gonville's straight-backed version feels much more balanced to me. You could probably just rotate that glyph in a TimeSignature override, if you wanted. ;) it would be nicer if Lilypond itself could centre the digits around the 2nd and 4th lines of the stave in the case where they're smaller than 2*staff_spacing Be sure to consider non-5-line staff situations. Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
Simon Tatham ana...@pobox.com writes: I may yet make another attempt at redesigning the multiple flags. The intention was to have them all essentially similar in shape Why? What do you gain by smaller note values essentially making a spread-out regular rectangular black pattern across the page rather than being characteristic compact shapes capturing the necessary distinguishable information? We use proportional fonts and ligatures in typesetting, not to save space, but to give the eye a constant and aesthetic flow of information shaping itself into recognizable word patterns of comparable greyness. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
Wow too. Actually, there are things in Feta what I don't feel natural either. For example: the caesura sign, the G-clef and the trill indication feels better for me in Gonville. Though the G-clef is I think a clear LilyPond watermark, so I would keep that one :) The best would be if I could set up where to get which glyph from. Bert Simon Tatham wrote: Hi, I've recently drawn a new font of musical symbols for use with Lilypond, which look more like the ones I'm used to and hence distract me less. I put it up on the web this weekend at http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/ Currently the only way I've found to use that font with Lilypond is to create a symlink mirror of the entire Lilypond data directory, replace the 'fonts' subdirectory, and point $LILYPOND_DATADIR at the altered copy. Would it be possible to introduce a command-line or configuration option of some sort, to make it easier to select an alternative font? (Or is there one I've missed?) Cheers, Simon ___ 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: Alternative music font
(I hope this reply to the list works. I had to post my previous message through the Gmane interface, but if I have to post this one the same way, I won't be able to get the In-Reply-To header to work properly.) Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Wow. You created a full font? That must have taken quite some time! I think Feta took Han-Wen and me something between one and two man-years of work. This one has only taken me a couple of months (including some initial thought about how to get nice-looking curves without an excessive amount of manual specification). But then, it's very likely that a lot of yours is better thought out in many ways that I didn't pay much attention to. (Just for a start, I haven't implemented your subtle variation between the different point sizes, except in the braces.) I feel a bit disappointed because one of my goals was to create a font that would look like the most beautiful music that I have seen. As one of our explicit goals for LilyPond is for the printed music /not/ to distract the player, we evidently failed to achieve this for you. I'm afraid so, but then, it doesn't seem surprising to me that one answer doesn't satisfy everybody's tastes! I don't think you have any call to feel disappointed at not having managed to please absolutely everybody. Looking at Gonville it's not so difficult to imagine for me how this could be, as I cannot remember ever having seen music that looks much like it. For example, the up-flags are much fatter and rounder/shorter than the down flags, is that intentional? I may yet make another attempt at redesigning the multiple flags. The intention was to have them all essentially similar in shape (unlike, say, Feta's quadruple down-flag in which the four flags look very different from each other) and bold enough to make it easy to see how many of them there were. They're all currently 'the same thickness' in the sense that every flag covers the same vertical length of stem where it joins on to it; that's something that I may re-think later on in favour of a more subjective idea of 'sameness', because I've already had one mild criticism of it. What is the status of the font, is it ready for general use, is it finished? Initial development is complete. I may make changes, but probably not until I've collected some feedback and got a general idea of what really does want changing and what's a silly idea I've accidentally talked myself into by thinking too hard about it... Up till now we have been advertising Feta as being the lilypond font and describing it mostly with general terms as beautiful and designed after the best typesetting traditions. In some places, possibly the essay and talks, we elaborated on the fatness, eg see the short note of font design at http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/typography-features One comment from a friend about the difference between the two fonts was that a thing he liked about Gonville was that it looked more modern. Feta certainly seems to be striving after a 'traditional' look, and perhaps that's precisely what is not to everyone's taste (one person's 'traditional' is another's 'old-fashioned' :-). Now that you created a second working font for Lily, it would be nice if both fonts were [more explicitly] advertised as to what they were designed after. The LilyPond font sources contain quite a few citings of sources of inspiration, eg [...] Sadly I don't have anything like that sort of detailed citation available. I grew up playing the violin, and in designing Gonville I was trying to recall the look of the sheet music I was provided with by my teachers, because that was what I was used to reading; unfortunately, I don't have most of that sheet music any more, so all I can give is vague generalities. Ultimately, my design criterion was that it should satisfy my personal subjective aesthetic criteria. Feedback so far suggests that at least a few other people's criteria are not too far off mine, but I don't think I could really give a scholarly analysis of where mine came from. Further, common [text-]font considerations were taken into account. For example, a glyph should look balanced out. It should not lean backward of forward, inviting the reader to catch it before it falls over :-) It's interesting that you should mention that: that actually reminds me of one of my specific issues with Feta, namely that the curved centre line of its treble clef _does_ make it look to me as if it's leaning over backwards. Gonville's straight-backed version feels much more balanced to me. Do you intend to have Gonville included in LilyPond? You'd be welcome to include it if you wanted to, but I hadn't particularly expected that you would - I was under no illusions that you'd instantly prefer it to the font you've carefully tuned to the criteria you consider important! I'm perfectly happy to maintain it as a third-party accessory,
Re: Alternative music font
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: Op maandag 19-10-2009 om 15:05 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Simon Tatham: (I hope this reply to the list works. I think not, you'll have to subscribe. If this helps, I did receive Simon's earlier mail on the list. (Perhaps he's already subscribed?) I have now added this interesting discussion to the tracker as a possible Enhancement: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=870 Cheers, Valentin ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Alternative music font
Op maandag 19-10-2009 om 15:33 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Simon Tatham: Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke-l...@xs4all.nl wrote: This one has only taken me a couple of months (including some initial thought about how to get nice-looking curves without an excessive amount of manual specification). Great. Are you willing to spend more time on this, to finish it? But then, it's very likely that a lot of yours is better thought out in many ways that I didn't pay much attention to. (Just for a start, I haven't implemented your subtle variation between the different point sizes, except in the braces.) Possibly. Then again, we started off by using someone else's font and replace the note head by our own. As an aside, I found the note head much too round, almost as round as Gonville's ;-) FWIW, the point sizes thing is not what took most of that time. Have you looked at our font sources? See for example in mf/feta-nummer-code.mf: fatten := number_design_size * h + b; you can do that! I'm afraid so, but then, it doesn't seem surprising to me that one answer doesn't satisfy everybody's tastes! I don't think you have any call to feel disappointed at not having managed to please absolutely everybody. Probably you're right. But send us a patch then, tweak some things, But to redo the whole font! Man, that's just cruel! ;-) I may yet make another attempt at redesigning the multiple flags. Ah, good. The intention was to have them all essentially similar in shape (unlike, say, Feta's quadruple down-flag in which the four flags look very different from each other) and bold enough to make it easy to see how many of them there were. Yeah I remember Han-Wen found that all flags need to be designed as a whole and have a different curvature; after trying to do what Sonata did, just stacking flags. Unfortunately, I do not see anything about that fact in the sources. They're all currently 'the same thickness' in the sense that every flag covers the same vertical length That may be so, but have a look at the blackness of the single 8th up-flag in the third measure and compare it to the two 16ths to the right of that. The 16th flags cover a triangle with about or over 50% of the rectangle it cuts between the staff lines. In contrast the single eight only has a small black wedge? Possibly the staff line plays a bit unfortunate here, but eh, you'd have to count with having a staff lines here and there, I guess. What is the status of the font, is it ready for general use, is it finished? Initial development is complete. I may make changes, but probably not until I've collected some feedback and got a general idea of what really does want changing and what's a silly idea I've accidentally talked myself into by thinking too hard about it... Okay. So why not work on a patch to hook it up to LilyPond -- best chances to get some feedback. One comment from a friend about the difference between the two fonts was that a thing he liked about Gonville was that it looked more modern. Feta certainly seems to be striving after a 'traditional' look, and perhaps that's precisely what is not to everyone's taste (one person's 'traditional' is another's 'old-fashioned' :-). Yeah well, anything to get the young, fashionable new on-storming generations hooked to LilyPond, I guess. Sadly I don't have anything like that sort of detailed citation available. I grew up playing the violin, and in designing Gonville I was trying to recall the look of the sheet music I was provided with by my teachers, because that was what I was used to reading; unfortunately, I don't have most of that sheet music any more, so all I can give is vague generalities. Well, you'll just have to go look for some of those then? I mean, if Gonville looks like most music you ever saw, such music cannot be hard to find? I mean, not that you /must/, but it would help you to describe the musical practice or culture the font is based on. It would help others that would like to add or change glyphs very much if they could go look for publications that have such a font? And how can we send bug reports if we have nothing to compare it to? :-) It's interesting that you should mention that: that actually reminds me of one of my specific issues with Feta, namely that the curved centre line of its treble clef _does_ make it look to me as if it's leaning over backwards. Gonville's straight-backed version feels much more balanced to me. That would be a bug. How many degrees would you need to rotate it to get it straight, in your opinion? You'd be welcome to include it if you wanted to Sorry, I don't think it works that way. But you can always send a patch. - I was under no illusions that you'd instantly prefer it to the font you've carefully tuned to the criteria you consider important! Of course I do. But others using LilyPond may not? All I'd suggest is trivial changes to Lilypond to make it easy to
Re: Alternative music font
it would be nicer if Lilypond itself could centre the digits around the 2nd and 4th lines of the stave in the case where they're smaller than 2*staff_spacing Be sure to consider non-5-line staff situations. Character glyph could be raised above the baseline using a seperate coding point for the musical semantic of a mensural symbol - trick then would be to get ly to use that instead of the other. Leave the numerals alone for use as numerals (ms # and what have you), but clone the glyph (Fontographer had a way to copy the glyph leaving it dynamically linked). -- Dana Emery ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
