Re: Photoscore

[Urs Liska]

Am 28.11.2016 um 17:12 schrieb Johan Vromans:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2016 00:48:59 +0100, Urs Liska <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> The big houses more or less *exclusively* use Sibelius and Finale in
>> parallel, with a very low share still using SCORE and an actually tiny
>> share using Amadeus.
>>
>> Breitkopf just last year decided to quit any diversity and to move
>> everything to Sibelius.
> For what reason do they still insist on tools and not on results?
>
> I've been in a similar situation with a great US publisher who insisted on
> receiving materials in some proprietary format (later they switched to an
> even worse XML format). I showed them that I could provide camera-ready
> printfiles (PostScript, later PDF) that matched every inch of their
> standards. And I kept my part of the deal by delivering on time. As a
> bonus, I got a slightly higher percentage of the revenues since they only
> thing they had to do was to hit the print button.
>
> I've had more experiences like this with other publishers.
>
> For LilyPond this would mean: Can we produce printfiles that look like they
> are generated from their favourite tools (but better, of course).

The point (and a partially understandable one) is that publishers don't
want to get prepress files but files they can edit in the future, even
if the original person is not available anymore. So a company has its
staff or its number of contractors they know, and they will need to work
with them. Even some open-mindedness given (which is not that
impossible) it's fair to assume that they can't be sure to have
sufficient manpower and support available when "you" aren't available
anymore.

Urs

> -- Johan
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user