|
From: | Phil Holmes |
Subject: | Re: Optimising output for screen. |
Date: | Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:44:58 +0100 |
To: <address@hidden> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 6:32 PM Subject: Re: Optimising output for screen.
Graham Percival wrote .... PS if you want a hint, one of those discussions was in 2007.Graham, Thanks for the pointer..had a chuckle with the continued discussion 2 years later. Pity the solution was never accepted/implemented, probably not a very important issue then, but I believe it will be in a few years to come if we still want 'beautiful' output.
I didn't read this as arriving at a solution.
Kaz Kylheku wrote .... In fact, Lilypond's output doesn't have a resolution. It is vector graphics. The music symbols you are seeing are drawn using Bezier curves and lines.A line must have a starting point, an ending point or length, and a thickness at least. Whether those attributes are expressed in pixels, inches, mm or whatnots - they are still a form of resolution.
Not at all. It would be possible to express a line width as .111111111111 etc mm. Eventually you hit the computer's limits on numerical resolution, but this is far better than display resolution.
If I want a horizontal line 10 inches long and 1/100th inch thick, I'm going to have problems displaying it on 96dpi screen if I want those dimensions respected. It's a problem of resolution.
Exactly. And until screen resolutions improve, you're never going to get the on screen display as good as the printed version.
-- Phil Holmes
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |