Michael Good / 05.1.17 / 00:13 PM wrote: >Hi Hiro, > >First, thanks for the beautiful music you shared with us at the >holidays!
Thank you so much! Appreciate it. >The developers of the SmartScore import feature would benefit from it. >It is much easier to develop an importer of any type for Finale if you >can control what the default document looks like. A large part of our >MusicXML software is devoted to *not* making assumptions about the >default file, and instead just using what is there. We would make our >development work simpler by just using a hard-coded default file, but it >wouldn't work as well for plug-in users. Ahh, I understand. I was not familiar with Scan feature since I haven't needed it that much. I have some questions from my experience last night. The original was MacFinale98 output, scanned in 300dpi. The archived printout was very clean, and nothing was too tight or anything. Yet I after all felt I should had created from the scratch instead of scan. - Missed a lot of measures here and there, one or two measures at a time, while inserted empty measures where totally unrelated spots from missed measures. I was unable to see how SmartScore misunderstood like this. - All the triprets became two 8th with double-sharp attached. - All the tied notes, if not the beginning of the tie, and if accidental is attached, became natural but cancellation of the accidentals were invisible... strange. - Missed a lot of ties even though the original was rather obvious. The scanned image's x-y was straighten in Photoshop prior to SmartScan. I assume 300dpi is good enough. What else I could had tried to make SmartScan better? -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA <http://a-no-ne.com> <http://anonemusic.com> _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
