On Nov 26, 2006, at 8:01 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
Chuck Israels wrote:
I continue to stumble on difficulties that seem to be more
trouble than I used to
Such as (beyond the beam angles, etc. we've discussed)?
Robert,
The main time consumer for me has to do with how long each part
layout takes when there is no way (as far as I have been able to
figure out) to use one part as a template for another similar one.
Also, I have encountered some strange "wanderings" of staff styles,
and it's been hard for me to nail down the moment when it occurs. On
a file I was working on for the last couple of days (2 days of parts
layout time for a relatively complex 200+ measure big band piece with
some parts that resemble one another, and some that don't), on going
back to the score after creating parts, slash notation style was lost
in some places and had moved to other staves where it didn't belong.
Of course, this is a bug - not a characteristic of the linked parts
system, but it takes time to repair just the same.
I want this to work for me, partly because I was one of those who
asked for it, and partly because the editing of an existing work can
be so much more efficient. If anyone comes up with a way of using
one part as a template for another in this system, I will be
convinced that there is no reason to look back.
What you say below is certainly true in my experience too. It's just
that there are remaining obstacles for me. I can't say that I am
overjoyed with the way the show/hide system is working for page
numbers, titles, and other elements that need to be different in the
score and the parts. I'm not sure I can see a better way, but the
screen seems cluttered to me when I have to look at grayed out things
that are needed in another view. I can live with that, but it lacks
a certain visual clarity and elegance on the screen. Printed
versions are another matter. They look fine.
My 2c.
Chuck
If the end result is the same, and the new method simply takes
longer, I'm not sure it is helping my workflow.
When I first played with the feature I shared these concerns. After
using it in reality for the last few months, I'm finding it
surprisingly useful. Although I have not yet used it for a major
project, some immediate time savings are:
* there no longer is a part extraction process. The part extraction
itself is a signficant time drain if there are many parts that are
complicated. And it is tedious and repetitive if you care about
your file names.
* printing is so much easier. You can print all the parts at once.
The more parts there are the better this is.
* switching between parts is far faster. Part extraction has always
been for me a means of finding mistakes, and correcting mistakes is
light years ahead of what it used to be, even if I have to correct
duplicate staves.
Also, now that I somewhat have the hang of how it all works, I
don't find that I am spending time in new ways particularly. That's
why I asked the first question above. ymmv of course.
--
Robert Patterson
http://RobertGPatterson.com
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Chuck Israels
230 North Garden Terrace
Bellingham, WA 98225-5836
phone (360) 671-3402
fax (360) 676-6055
www.chuckisraels.com
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
