Carl Peterson writes:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 4:45 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Carl Peterson writes:
>
> > I'm not an expert on GhostScript, but in practice it is nearly
> always
> > best to rasterize vector graphics at the intended output
> resolution.
>
>
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 4:45 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Carl Peterson writes:
>
> > I'm not an expert on GhostScript, but in practice it is nearly always
> > best to rasterize vector graphics at the intended output resolution.
>
> Except when it isn't. What makes you think that the PDF viewers a
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 21:50:59 +0100
"Phil Holmes" wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Urs Liska"
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2013 9:05 PM
> Subject: Re: Cropped output (à la -dpreview) possible in Finale and Sibelius
>
>
> > Am 09
Carl Peterson writes:
> I'm not an expert on GhostScript, but in practice it is nearly always
> best to rasterize vector graphics at the intended output resolution.
Except when it isn't. What makes you think that the PDF viewers are
doing anything but rasterizing vector graphics at the intended
Am 09.04.2013 18:26, schrieb Urs Liska:
I never used Sibelius, and the last version of Finale I actually
worked with was 2001.
Therefore I'd like to ask here before writing something
inappropriately negative about them ;-)
Is it possible to output cropped output in .png or .pdf format from
th
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
t
> 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
On 04/09/2013 08:47 PM, Alexander Kobel wrote:
[...]
Besides, rectangles bound /regions,/ and I see a valid point in not
willfully changing regions or areas. For lines, it's slightly more
likely that the designer intended the object to be a line than for
rectangles. [...]
By the way: I stumble
Alexander Kobel writes:
> On 04/09/2013 08:26 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>> 2013/4/9 Werner LEMBERG:
>>>
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 the
On 04/09/2013 08:26 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
2013/4/9 Werner LEMBERG:
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 st
The problem is that how a Lily output is rendered by a PDF reader is not
within the realm of control for Lilypond. The fact is that some PDF
features are handled differently by different viewers, if they are handled
at all. For example, in my graphic design work, I learned that transparency
is a bi
2013/4/9 David Kastrup :
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>
>> 2013/4/9 David Kastrup :
>>> Urs Liska 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 t
> It's a very hard problem and probably not solvable.
Ah, I misread, sorry. Yes, it might be worth to test with line
strokes.
Werner
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 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 :(
It's a very hard problem and probably not solvable. Essen
Janek Warchoł writes:
> 2013/4/9 David Kastrup :
>> Urs Liska 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_
>> a
2013/4/9 David Kastrup :
> Urs Liska 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
Urs Liska 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.
Hopefully not t
Thanks for that clarification.
So this isn't a 'selling point' for LilyPond anymore ...
Urs
Am 09.04.2013 18:59, schrieb Phil Holmes:
- Original Message - From: "Urs Liska"
To: "Lilypond-User"
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2013 5:26 PM
Subject: Cropped
On 04/09/2013 06:26 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
> When I used Finale one had to draw a rectangle with the mouse that then was
> exported.
> Needless to say that this is a poor way to consistently line up music
> fragments
> in a text document.
I doubt this is the way a hardcore professional engraving pe
I never used Sibelius, and the last version of Finale I actually worked
with was 2001.
Therefore I'd like to ask here before writing something inappropriately
negative about them ;-)
Is it possible to output cropped output in .png or .pdf format from
them, just like -dpreview or lilypond-book
20 matches
Mail list logo
