lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th


From: Phil Holmes
Subject: Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:23:35 -0000


Janek,
 
I prefer the newer ones, although I doubt I'll use them too often in real music!
 
However, I was looking at my Gardner Read and think that, strictly, all the flag shapes are a little wrong according to his "rules".  The quaver flag is too short, and the shorter note flags don't join the stem properly.  To be honest I'm not too bothered, but wondered what other people think.  Please see the attached scan from his book, which is a few excerpts from pages stuck together.

--
Phil Holmes
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 11:41 AM
Subject: Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags

Oops, i forgot to CC the list! Sorry.
I've prepared flag touch-ups, including changes suggested by Carl.
They are here:
http://codereview.appspot.com/4273074/
I attach a simple proof-sheet showing these changes.

cheers,
Janek


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Janek Warchoł <address@hidden>
Date: 2011/3/16
Subject: Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags
To: Carl Sorensen <address@hidden>

W dniu 16 marca 2011 00:25 użytkownik Carl Sorensen
<address@hidden> napisał:
> On 3/15/11 3:24 PM, "Janek Warchoł" <address@hidden>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> there is quite a lot of space between flag and the notehead in case of
>> downstem 64th and 128th notes (at least compared to 16th and 32nd
>> flags). I *suppose* these flags were made this way because they were
>> intended for use with both shortened stems and full-length stems, and
>> if the gaps were smaller, the flags would look bad on shortened stems.
>> However, we are going to have dedicated flags for shorter stems soon,
>> so maybe we want to tweak the design of 64th and 128th downstem flags
>> to something roughly like suggestion.png?
>
> I prefer the new ones to the old ones, but I think that all of them need
> further adjustment.  In the words of Read (p. 80)
>
> "For each additional flag beyond two, the stem is extended by two staff
> degrees [1 staff space -- my addition], and the new flag is drawn parallel
> to the previous one(s), with the additional curved line joining the curved
> line of the first flag."
>
> In the 64th and 128th flags currently in the Feta font, the lines are not
> parallel at all, and I think that makes the flags look unbalanced.

Personally i don't like this, too. I didn't touch it because it seemed
as an intentional feature, but if we want to change it, i'll prepare a
fix so that other developers may discuss it.
However, i think that we shouldn't make flags totally parallel - doing
so would change the "feel" of the font very much, and i'm not sure if
it would be an optimal solution, too.

> P.S. Janek, Amazon has used copies of Read in paperback for $9.97.  At that
> price it may be worth purchasing.

Thanks for info! i'll consider this.

cheers,
Janek


_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Attachment: FlagsRead.png
Description: PNG image


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]