Re: Issue 1752 in lilypond: redesigning G clef in our Feta font

[lilypond]

Comment #9 on issue 1752 by address@hidden: redesigning G clef in  
our Feta font
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1752

2011/7/10  <address@hidden>:

> Comment #5 on issue 1752 by pkx166h: redesigning G clef in our Feta font
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1752

> To me this is a pretty fundamental change in the look of the Feta Font,  
> and
> while I am not against change per se, is this change for change's sake?

I'm changing it because it doesn't look good.  There is  
enough "not-goodness" that it warrants the change in my opinon.

> After all the g clef is kind of *the* primary glyph (at least I'd say it  
> was
> THE primary glyph) for most of the music I set.

The notehead seems to be a bit more primary, but it's too simple to be  
considered.
So yes, i agree - we should be very careful when changing this glyph.

> I don't believe
> that we have had complaints about the G clef before to warrant a change?

As we have seen in the discussion on -devel, there are people who didn't  
like the current treble clef even before i suggested the change.
Perhaps they didn't feel like changing it themselves, so they decided not  
to make the fuss.

> What happens if we do change this glyph? How can mere mortals like me who
> cannot 'roll my own' glyph get back the clef I prefer?

Maybe let's use a solution similar to choosing between one- and  
double-lined breve notehead?  
(http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/notation-big-page#durations)

> To me this isn't an enhancement at all, it's detractment (?) and a
> fundamental one at that.

Hmm, i hope that you'll like the updated suggestion better.


2011/7/10  <address@hidden>:
> Comment #4 on issue 1752 by address@hidden:

> I like the new height, but the top loop is too bent to the right.

> In the file attached, you can see A, B and C aren't aligned, contrary to  
> the
> current clef (red line).

I'm not sure if i agree that these should really line up (examine engraved  
clefs attached above), but the revised version of my suggestion partially  
addresses this.


2011/7/10  <address@hidden>:
> The curves of the cue clef seem crimped to me, which may be a result of  
> the
> smaller top portion.

It is bigger in the new proposal, how do you like it?

thanks,
Janek

PS sorry if this is double post.

Attachments:
        bwv1017 current Lily.pdf  417 KB
        bwv1017 new proposal.pdf  420 KB
        bwv-988-v25 current Lily.pdf  107 KB
        bwv-988-v25 new proposal.pdf  107 KB
        Chop-28-20 current Lily.pdf  52.7 KB
        Chop-28-20 new proposal.pdf  52.2 KB
        Minuet-xpose current Lily.pdf  50.8 KB
        Minuet-xpose new proposal.pdf  50.6 KB
        treble clefs current Lily.pdf  37.7 KB
        treble clefs new proposal.pdf  37.0 KB