Re: Patch for yet again new noteheads (triangle-shaped)

[Maximilian Albert]

>> The gap was an attempt to neutralize that optical effect, but
>> perhaps it doesn't quite work.
> 
> The gap will simply be blackened by lower resolutions...

True. And you are probably right, it doesn't really look that good.


>> What other strategies are there?
> 
> Well, as Han-Wen said: Make the triangle shape slightly bigger
> vertically: In case the triangle sits on a note line, this isn't
> visible.  In the other case, the broadened base should correct the
> optical size.

Attached is an attempt to implement this suggestion. It is essentially
what I had tried before introducing the gap, except for the slightly
larger vertical extent. I'm not sure if Han-Wen meant to make the tip
simply enter the staffline (so that it is still covered) or protrude
through it, so I tried it both. (Sorry for cluttering the mailing list
with the *.pdf files; I hope the sizes aren't too big).

I'm not entirely convinced, though (but my opinion is not really
relevant in this matter, since there are much more experienced people on
this list). The overshooting in the second file is IMHO already fairly
large when seen from close-by, but barely visible from further apart,
probably also at low resolutions. Should it be even larger? Also, at
first I thought that the increased size gives the glyph a slightly
awkward look, but that feeling disappeared when I got used to it. ;)

And still, I can't help it: At least to me it seems that when the
triangle base touches a staffline, the line looks as if it covered part
of the triangle's shape. In both files, this makes the corresponding
triangle appear larger - as if its height were extended by precisely one
stafflinethickness. Or am I wrong? Can this problem be overcome at all?

BTW, the shape of the glyph is taken from the 'do' notehead of the solfa
style - only with centered stem and flipped vertically if required. So
the same comment applies if someone uses the 'do' notehead between
stafflines.

But if you say that you are satisfied with the shape and positioning as
it is, then I certainly won't object (especially since I don't see a way
to make the 'problem' disappear - if it is one at all). Further comments
are welcome.

Thanks for your time and your opinions,
Max

triangle_inshooting.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

triangle_overshooting.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document