I'm not an expert on GhostScript, but in practice it is nearly always best to rasterize vector graphics at the intended output resolution. The issue is how that graphic is downsampled. For example, if I rasterize a two-pixel wide black vertical line down to half the resolution, depending on where those two pixels I could either end up with a one-pixel wide black line or a two-pixel wide gray line.
In my opinion, the best solution for PNG output is to quantize as many of the measurements as possible/practical. So if outputting a score at 72dpi for screen presentation, require that widths/positions/etc, be such so that they render cleanly. This is not as simple as it sounds, unfortunately. It's not like quantizing music, where I can just snap everything to a beat. With lines particularly, care has to be given to even and odd widths and line centers, etc. Cheers, Carl On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> wrote: > > > As far as what can be controlled by Lilypond and it's developers, > > making sure PNG files are generated well *is* something that should > > be addressed, since that is completely within Lilypond's control. > > Does GhostScript's PNG backend produces satisfying results? > Otherwise, what about creating high-resolution images which get > sampled down? I'm not a graphics expert, so just guessing. > > > Werner >
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
