Am 28.11.2016 um 17:12 schrieb Johan Vromans: > On Mon, 28 Nov 2016 00:48:59 +0100, Urs Liska <u...@openlilylib.org> wrote: > >> The big houses more or less *exclusively* use Sibelius and Finale in >> parallel, with a very low share still using SCORE and an actually tiny >> share using Amadeus. >> >> Breitkopf just last year decided to quit any diversity and to move >> everything to Sibelius. > For what reason do they still insist on tools and not on results? > > I've been in a similar situation with a great US publisher who insisted on > receiving materials in some proprietary format (later they switched to an > even worse XML format). I showed them that I could provide camera-ready > printfiles (PostScript, later PDF) that matched every inch of their > standards. And I kept my part of the deal by delivering on time. As a > bonus, I got a slightly higher percentage of the revenues since they only > thing they had to do was to hit the print button. > > I've had more experiences like this with other publishers. > > For LilyPond this would mean: Can we produce printfiles that look like they > are generated from their favourite tools (but better, of course).
The point (and a partially understandable one) is that publishers don't want to get prepress files but files they can edit in the future, even if the original person is not available anymore. So a company has its staff or its number of contractors they know, and they will need to work with them. Even some open-mindedness given (which is not that impossible) it's fair to assume that they can't be sure to have sufficient manpower and support available when "you" aren't available anymore. Urs > -- Johan > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
