SoundsFromSound <[email protected]> writes: > David Kastrup wrote
>> That very much appears like you are not properly converting your PDF for >> use with the "high quality" printer. >> >>> Please see attached images and if someone could please let me know if I'm >>> doing something wrong - or if there is a way to soften the hairpins - >>> that >>> would be awesome! :) >>> >>> finale_14_line.png >>> <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n158826/finale_14_line.png> >>> >>> >>> LilyPond_PDF_line_-_jagged.png >>> <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n158826/LilyPond_PDF_line_-_jagged.png> >>> >>> LilyPond_-_during_input.png >>> <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n158826/LilyPond_-_during_input.png> >> >> The first thing you are doing wrong is not describing at all what the >> images are supposed to be from. "LilyPond_-_during_input"? Seriously? >> My LilyPond files look like "c16 d e d r4" during input. > Hi David, > > For these examples I was on Windows 7 using the Adobe Acrobat PDF > printer set to either 600 or 1200dpi, sorry I can't recall. Since LilyPond does not use anything like an "Adobe Acrobat PDF printer" for producing its PDF files, that does not seem like useful information at all. You also don't state whether this "PDF printer" comes into play for LilyPond output or Finale output. > These were done late last night. But that's the only PDF printer > option I use when printing to PDF, regardless of program. Now you are talking about printing _to_ PDF. LilyPond does not even have any mechanism where its PDF production could involve an Adobe utility. So this is plain nonsense. Then you are talking about setting some printing resolution. If you render to 600dpi while printing to a 1200dpi printer (and 600dpi does not qualify as "high quality" with printers these days), then the result will be jagged. Printer dots are somewhere between round and square at nominal resolution and will combine more or less gracefully. However, when rendering at half resolution or less, a high quality printer will produce sharp edges and steps. That's what it's high quality is good for: it will reproduce the imaging of a low-quality printer better than the low-quality printer itself could. > Also I had thought I renamed all the images correctly after working > last night but it looks like I left one untouched and uploaded it. The > 'during-input' was the name I gave it to remind me that that > particular image was what I saw while inputting into > Frescobaldi. Frescobaldi uses an entirely different previewing mechanism (Cairo) than going through a PDF previewer (though some use it as well, they'll likely drive it differently). It will definitely benefit from the -dstrokeadjust option and reduce the variation in thickness due to staircasing. The staircasing itself when viewed on each edge of the line independently will not likely be much affected, however. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
