Hi Kieren, Hi Carl,
I don't think that a standard scaling will help in this case.
Here's an illustration of what could happened :
\markup {
\combine
\with-color #magenta
\scale #'(1.2 . 1.2)
\musicglyph #"clefs.G"
\musicglyph #"clefs.G"
}
Whatever glyph re-centering, you'll never get a proper whiteout.
One has to define a specific scaling function that can "blows" the glyph in
order to get a bold one.
Cheers,
Pierre
2015-04-29 2:26 GMT+02:00 Kieren MacMillan <[email protected]>:
> Hi Carl,
>
> >> 1. follow exactly the grob/glyph outline (i.e., not just a
> rectangle/box,
> >> as currently implemented);
> >> 2. include a parameter to set the thickness of the outline; and
> >> 3. include a parameter to determine whether the whiteout was filled
> >> throughout, or allowed ³holes² inside (as per the grob/glyph outline).
> >
> > I think that doing all 3 things is virtually impossible, given my
> > understanding of the current state of stencil handling.
>
> Okay. Thanks for the information.
>
> > I think that a stencil whiteout for simple stencils could be created by
> > combining two stencils:
> > 1) the original stencil
> > 2) a scaled version of the original stencil, colored white, and placed on
> > a lower layer
> > The amount of scaling would determine the thickness of the outline.
> > There would be no way of dealing properly with holes.
>
> That might be sufficient for the vast majority of cases I’ve seen.
> I’ll see if I can work out a quick Scheme function to accomplish what
> you’ve suggested here.
>
> Thanks,
> Kieren.
> ________________________________
>
> Kieren MacMillan, composer
> ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
> ‣ email: [email protected]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
