[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: New notehead (accent)

From: Maximilian Albert
Subject: Re: New notehead (accent)
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 16:31:37 +0200
User-agent: IceDove (X11/20070329)

Han-Wen Nienhuys schrieb:

> Regarding the accents, I'm a bit confused still. Why don't you simply
> plug in the existing accent symbol by setting a couple of callbacks ?

Well, we were aiming for a kind of 'calligraphic' look. That is, if
possible the lower 'leg' of the accent should be somewhat thicker than
the upper one. So the existing function "draw_accent" would have to be
adapted anyway. Also, it draws circular 'caps' for the vertices, which
IMHO looks ugly when the lines of the accent are much thicker than in
the glyphs for which the function is currently used (such as 'sforzato',
'espressivo', 'upbow', etc.) - example on request.

I personally liked the approach taken in the 'marcato' glyph much
better, where the ends of the legs are essentially flat, with slightly
rounded corners. That's why I used that one as a template. Is this a
problem? Should I have done it differently?

Attached are two further examples I have prepared to attenuate the
effect of 'smearing' Werner mentioned. In the first file the inner part
of the accent is drawn slimmer, as suggested. But this makes the right
part of the upper leg quite narrow. Whence the second file, where that
part is a bit wider. Opinions?

As far as I can tell this takes away much of the ugliness at the inner
angle for the accents that sit *on* stafflines. But I'm not sure if the
slight bending of the edge is too visible (especially on the lower leg)
for the accents *between* stafflines. What do you think?


Attachment: accent1.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: accent2.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

reply via email to

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