[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: mensural notation: patch, question, plan

From: Pal Benko
Subject: Re: mensural notation: patch, question, plan
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:24:22 +0100
User-agent: Opera M2/7.54u1 (Linux, build 892)

Hi J├╝rgen,

Currently, the thickness property of the flexa shape aplies to all
segments of the outline.  IIUC, you are suggesting to apply the
thickness property only to the left and right outline segment of the
flexa shape, while hard-wiring the upper and lower segment wrt to the
proportions in the .mf code for the brevis note head.  I think this is
somewhat inconsistent.  If we really need different thicknesses for
the vertical and horizontal segments, we may want to control this
behavior with a separate property.

That's fine with me.

However, I just looked at a few facsimiles as well as contemporary
educational works on mensural ligatures, and my impression is that all
line segments roughly have the same thickness (unless the steepness is
extremely high, in which case we may want to apply some thickness
correction factor to the horizontal segments in order to compensate
for optical illusion effects).  Do you really think that the
horizontal and vertical segments need to be controlled separately?


Do you have facsimiles or contemporary works with noticeable
difference between the thickness of the horizontal and vertical
outline segments?

Yes: I have facsimiles of about twenty masses from Petrucci prints and
different codices (e.g. the Chigi codex; I don't know where the other
facsimiles come from).  There are at least three different scribes
(i.e. script styles) I can distinguish.  The horizontal lines of
flexae are always like that of breves and not like the vertical ones
(i.e. distinctly heavier).

If you are interested, I'll try to make some scans.


Miert fizetsz az internetert? Korlatlan, ingyenes internet hozzaferes a 
Probald ki most!

reply via email to

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