On Mar 2, 2005, at 11:44 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
Just for the record, I just had to optimize many parts out of the score, which weren't empty at all. This was possible because the optimization information is stored with the absolute system, and is in fact manually accessable. I do not wish this to be changed, simply because the way it works is ideal for the work I do.
For what it's worth, I also will occasionally choose to optimize out a system which has music in it. I would be disappointed if this possibility were taken away. I have no problem with some sort of warning or changeable default that helps newbies avoid getting confused by "disappearing" music without reducing the functionality for everyone else.
Some on this thread seem to be discussing "optimization" as if it were only the matter of making staves disappear in systems where they are empty. I don't see how optimization can be separated from the matter of specifying vertical positions for staves which vary from system to system. I use this constantly, because the vertical height of a piano accompaniment varies throughout the piece. A constant distance from voice staff to piano-treble staff is unacceptable because I don't want markings running into the lyrics on some staves, but neither do I want large unnecessary gaps of white space on others. Of course, this is layout-dependent, and if you later make changes to the piece which alter the layout, you're going to have to redo all the system optimization values. This isn't a bug in the software; it's inherent in the nature of the task.
Maybe some day Finale will cook up a function to look for vertical collisions and provide vertical positions for staves accordingly, and perhaps it will even do a consistently good job of it. Until that happens, I don't see how "optimization" can be taken away from the user and handed over to the software.
mdl
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
