[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Slanted Beams thickness

From: Luca Fascione
Subject: Re: Slanted Beams thickness
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 09:35:47 +0100

This video shows Hans Kuehner at work

at 4m36 shows beams being engraved, he appears to keep the instrument
orthogonal to the line direction,
which makes Valentin's formula appropriate to capture this process.

(I love it when it goes "What happens when you make mistakes?" -> "I
_don't_ make mistakes!" (7m59 or so) )

As Werner said, I'd have expected something more of a halfwayhouse, because
in my mind I was expecting more or a nib
pen feel to this, but even looking at photography based processes
there seems to be no evidence that any of that technique
would influence this.

I feel that for more organic looking fonts (such as lilyjazz) this might
want to change, but I guess that's a somewhat different


On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 8:10 AM Jean Abou Samra <> wrote:

> Le 25/03/2022 à 01:44, Valentin Petzel a écrit :
> > Hello,
> >
> > Lilypond handles slanted Beams in a geometrically weird way, that is, the
> > thickness is not measured as the shortest distance between the opposing
> sides
> > of the boundary, but as vertical distance. This results in Beams getting
> > optically thinner and closer the higher the slope is. But we can very
> easily
> > factor this out by adjusting the thickness to the slope. In fact if we
> want to
> > achieve a real thickness theta the adjusted thickness would need to be
> > theta·sqrt(1 + slope²). See attached an experimental example.
> Did you look into engraving literature to back this up?
> Given the amount of effort put by Han-Wen & Jan in beam
> formatting, I have trouble imagining this being just
> an oversight.
> Jean

reply via email to

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