Re: Template design for parts in the OP Project
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:51 am
Bump.
Partly for the sake of curiosity I've just downloaded the set of 34 PDFs for the parts of the Gurre-lieder - which, thanks to some careful combining by Perlnerd DCLXVI, actually include 61 individual parts (all of the wind and most of the brass PDFs are either two parts per PDF, or occasionally tripled), some of which are quite large - each of the violins' partbooks are on the order of 60 pages, and the viola and cellos actually exceed them in length. As predicted earlier in the thread, the parts dominate the page lengthwise (and would have done so even more dramatically had Sir Perlnerd not combined the wind and brass as he did), so that the work information and related stuff is buried at the bottom of the page...
Moreover, a lot of the info aligned against the right-hand column is common to all 34 parts and really only needs to be listed once, rather than 34 times, so a better way of presenting (or not presenting!) redundant information would be better - though we seem to have exceptions in the case of a number of cello parts that were "generously" uploaded somewhat earlier than the remainder of their sets. ;-)
Regards, PML
Partly for the sake of curiosity I've just downloaded the set of 34 PDFs for the parts of the Gurre-lieder - which, thanks to some careful combining by Perlnerd DCLXVI, actually include 61 individual parts (all of the wind and most of the brass PDFs are either two parts per PDF, or occasionally tripled), some of which are quite large - each of the violins' partbooks are on the order of 60 pages, and the viola and cellos actually exceed them in length. As predicted earlier in the thread, the parts dominate the page lengthwise (and would have done so even more dramatically had Sir Perlnerd not combined the wind and brass as he did), so that the work information and related stuff is buried at the bottom of the page...
Moreover, a lot of the info aligned against the right-hand column is common to all 34 parts and really only needs to be listed once, rather than 34 times, so a better way of presenting (or not presenting!) redundant information would be better - though we seem to have exceptions in the case of a number of cello parts that were "generously" uploaded somewhat earlier than the remainder of their sets. ;-)
Regards, PML