Do you feel the same about the dynamics as well? Se viewtopic.php?f=2&t=33#p431 for the full range.OCTO wrote:Looks well!
Two things: I think that thin lines are to thin or to say, bold are to bold. Something in-between for my taste I would like more...
Another: what if you have the accidentals somehow bigger, if 24, try with 25 or 26. Just as a test.
I don't agree with enlarging the accidentals for several reasons. Their size and proportions are one of the most important space saving factors in the font, along with the noteheads. Also, length of the vertical stems are sized to go clear of the staff line by a hair. Simply increasing the font size, eliminates this feature.
In addition, the font contains some 150–200 glyphs based on the standard accidental shapes. Any changes to these fundamental characters would spread through the entire accidentals range, something I would very much like to avoid at this point.
Fortunately though, most scoring applications let's you choose the exact font size for each separate category of symbols, so the user is free to deviate from the standard 24 points if desired.