Octo, just so I am sure I understand your reservations, how about this one?
I've made it upright and tuned the center swirl.
You also mentioned that the diagonal strokes were disproportionally bold and thin. I haven't made any changes to this, as the strokes need to match those of other clefs. Change one, and you need to change them all. Also, There is actually an even bigger difference in width of the same strokes in Engraver's , but it's also wider (to wide for my taste), and therefor comes across as less bold.
Clef design comparision
- Fred G. Unn
- Posts: 438
- Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 13:24
- Location: NYCish
Re: Clef design comparision
I suppose most have figured it out by now, but the fonts are, from L to R:
Maestro, Engraver, Petrucci, Opus, Sonata, Helsinki, Bravura
Maestro, Engraver, Petrucci, Opus, Sonata, Helsinki, Bravura
Re: Clef design comparision
Sorry for chiming in just to agree with what's already been said, but by the time I read these posts, my opinions have pretty much been expressed by the other contributors. It is kind of confirming! Octo's last contribution is handy. I agree that the difference between the thick (red & orange) and thin lines (green) in Knut's treble clef is too great, and I also prefer that the blue line be more vertical and not leaning to the right. That's what I like about nr. 2 (Engraver) and nr. 5 (Sonata): the verticalness as well as a good balance between thick and thin lines. Engraver's upper loop might be seen to be a bit too wide and its dot at the bottom a bit too heavy. Sonata's treble clef has the best balance, in my opinion, although it's perhaps slightly too small. I find Knut's other clefs very beautiful!
- John Ruggero
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
- Location: Raleigh, NC USA
Re: Clef design comparision
Knut, OCTO's blue line shows the clockwise rotation that you were describing. Did you actually design the clef with the blue line vertical and then rotate the symbol, or simply start with that angle and design the clef around it? I did rotate your clef and like it better that way.
I agree with OCTO that the orange and red parts are perhaps a little heavy; for me it is in relation to the width of the clef itself.
Edit: Oops, you did the same rotation while I was writing this post.
I agree with OCTO that the orange and red parts are perhaps a little heavy; for me it is in relation to the width of the clef itself.
Edit: Oops, you did the same rotation while I was writing this post.
M1 Mac mini (OS 12.4), Dorico, Finale 25.5, GPO 4, Affinity Publisher 2, SmartScore 64 Pro, JW Plug-ins, TG Tools, Keyboard maestro
http://www.cantilenapress.com
http://www.cantilenapress.com
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 13:43
Re: Clef design comparision
How is your font project evolving, Knut? It would be great to see a demo page or two when you reach that point!
Re: Clef design comparision
Yes, the clef was designed upright and rotated afterwards. The rotation is simply a nod to plate engraved scores.John Ruggero wrote:Did you actually design the clef with the blue line vertical and then rotate the symbol, or simply start with that angle and design the clef around it?
I see. So, the second one is better, but still to bold?John Ruggero wrote:For me it is in relation to the width of the clef itself.
Still working on it, but it's definitely coming along. The project got much bigger when I decided to make the font SMuFL compliant. I'll post a new demo when the initial glyph designs are finished.Trekkspillmannen wrote:How is your font project evolving, Knut? It would be great to see a demo page or two when you reach that point!
- John Ruggero
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
- Location: Raleigh, NC USA
Re: Clef design comparision
Yes, for me, it seems better upright. As far as the actual shape, we are now discussing minute differences. It would be interesting to see the clef a little less bold and/or a little wider to compare. As I said, for me treble clefs seem to fall into two categories: big but ugly, pretty but too slight. Yours would fall into the second category.Knut: I see. So, the second one is better, but still to bold?
M1 Mac mini (OS 12.4), Dorico, Finale 25.5, GPO 4, Affinity Publisher 2, SmartScore 64 Pro, JW Plug-ins, TG Tools, Keyboard maestro
http://www.cantilenapress.com
http://www.cantilenapress.com
Re: Clef design comparision
Well then, at least it's pretty.John Ruggero wrote:Yes, for me, it seems better upright. As far as the actual shape, we are now discussing minute differences. It would be interesting to see the clef a little less bold and/or a little wider to compare. As I said, for me treble clefs seem to fall into two categories: big but ugly, pretty but too slight. Yours would fall into the second category.Knut: I see. So, the second one is better, but still to bold?
I agree that the shape isn't perfect, and although we may not see exactly eye to eye on what constitutes the perfect , your feedback is nonetheless very valuable to me. I'll experiment a bit and post a new version soon.
Re: Clef design comparision
Here's a slightly less bold version with the bass clef for comparison.
Don't know if you can tell the difference, but it's pretty much what's possible without altering all the other clefs as well.
Don't know if you can tell the difference, but it's pretty much what's possible without altering all the other clefs as well.
Re: Clef design comparision
It looks much better for my eyes.
I think that some width should be added on but remaining the boldness... Possible?
I think that some width should be added on but remaining the boldness... Possible?
Freelance Composer. Self-Publisher.
Finale 27.5 • Sibelius 2024.3• MuseScore 4+ • Logic Pro X+ • Ableton Live 11+ • Digital Performer 11 /// MacOS Monterey (secondary in use systems: Fedora 35, Windows 10)
Finale 27.5 • Sibelius 2024.3• MuseScore 4+ • Logic Pro X+ • Ableton Live 11+ • Digital Performer 11 /// MacOS Monterey (secondary in use systems: Fedora 35, Windows 10)