On Sep 25, 2006, at 9:50 PM, Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
I am not trying to play "gotcha" here, despite the tone of my previous message (for which I apologize.) I just want to know what it was they didn't like. I don't think it is all attributable to Finale. I know Finale's default spacing is not up to professional standards, for example. But unless they are seeing Finale output tweaked by a pro, they aren't seeing what the program can do, and it is an unjust criticism, in addition to being non-specific.
Well, it wasn't really the same complaint as the original, if I have understood it properly. The original poster bemoaned the lack of human inconsistency in Finale's output compared to Sibelius', which I didn't think was a valid criticism. How many professional engravers WANT their work to look inconsistent? Beautiful, balanced and regular are words I hear a lot in describing fine engraving. All I have heard from your friends is that Finale "looked like a computer did it", which could mean anything from "I recognise that font" or "crap, not the default line thicknesses AGAIN!" to "the spacing and layout suck and there are collisions." Not much about consistency. Anyway, you are talking to a guy who uses an inkpen-type font (Jazzfont, with custom additions) in most of his work. I can't believe I am on the OTHER side of this argument for once. Christopher |
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
