2013/4/9 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: > Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: > >> 2013/4/9 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >>> Urs Liska <li...@ursliska.de> writes: >>> >>>> It seems this is Sibelius 7's default. See attached PNG. >>> >>> Huh? The perfectly rendered stafflines make it clear that this is not a >>> scanned image. But clef, noteheads and text are rendered _appallingly_ >>> awful, like it would be dithering the stroke widths. >> >> Have you seen http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2658 ? >> *That's* appalling - and it's how LilyPond output is rendered :( :( :( >> (image attached) >> It's sad that there are no comments on this issue after 9 months :( > > "Zoomed after taking screenshot" does not impress me all that much. It > involves a _viewer_ and _zooming_. > > _Most_ _definitely_ _not_ the default way to produce PNG.
My point is not in making PNGs, but in how Lily output is displayed on screen. If you say that PNGs from Sibelius look appalling, i say that pdfs from LilyPond look 10 times more appalling (when viewed on screen; they're not so appalling when printed, but the problem still exists). 2013/4/9 Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org>: > >> It's a very hard problem and probably not solvable. > > Ah, I misread, sorry. Yes, it might be worth to test with line > strokes. I find it most interesting that apparently there is some way to solve this problem. If line strokes render perfectly, why rounded rectangles don't? Janek _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
