Software that makes placemats

[Doggett]

Personally on the latest iteration for the Rebello Valente tasting, I think the droplets detract from the classic nature of the placemat and is like a very light version of Pollock’s number 14. I am all for pimping up the mats but this one is not for me... thoughts?

[jdaw1]

Personally on the latest iteration for the Rebello Valente tasting, I think the droplets detract from the classic nature of the placemat and is like a very light version of Pollock’s number 14. I am all for pimping up the mats but this one is not for me... thoughts?

I’d like to know what others think.

Some food for thought.

• From the log page of the Rebello Valente placemats: “Droplets will cover approximately 7.3% of non-margin bare page (ignoring overlaps and hollow inners, assuming no sharp turns, etc).”

• Thoughts on other decorative things? E.g.,:

◊ Spirals, Messias tasting 23 Oct 2019:






◊ CrossHatching, 1994 tasting on 11 June 2019:






◊ Flowers, Blind and Informal tasting on 21 May 2019:






◊ Stars, DRT’s Annual Elixir tasting on 26 Mar 2019:
 

[Doggett]

Quite liked the spirals, flowers and crosshatching. Not sold on the stars but the bold defining of the main elements is good to my taste a la Flowers.

[Glenn E.]

I like all of the above for different reasons. But if I'm honest, I probably won't use these features. We're pretty basic with our placemats and are very happy with just the core functionality.

I might try spirals (or anything else that fills the circle) some time. For some reason filling the glasses circle is more appealing to me than filling the empty space between glasses.

[jdaw1]

For some reason filling the glasses circle is more appealing to me than filling the empty space between glasses.

Is this a quirky feature of Simon and our American cousins (and hence perhaps ignorable), or is this a general preference?

Quite liked the spirals, flowers and crosshatching. Not sold on the stars but the bold defining of the main elements is good to my taste a la Flowers.

Flowers not so different to the Stars (compare this use of Hearts). Why the different preference?


I seek guidance.


Reminder: many many placemats shown at the list of placemats.

[Andy Velebil]

Quite liked the spirals, flowers and crosshatching. Not sold on the stars but the bold defining of the main elements is good to my taste a la Flowers.

Ditto

[Glenn E.]

For some reason filling the glasses circle is more appealing to me than filling the empty space between glasses.

Is this a quirky feature of Simon and our American cousins (and hence perhaps ignorable), or is this a general preference?

It is such a mild preference for me - on a feature that I'm not likely to use anyway - that it can be safely ignored, at least as far as I'm concerned.

[jdaw1]

Is it the shape of the flowers versus that of the stars? Or is it that in the examples above the stars are pale on pale, whereas the flowers are pale on dark?

Compare, for example, the 1963 horizontal on 10 April 2018.





Or, similar, the Cockburn vertical on 02 Oct 2018.

[PhilW]

I’d like to know what others think.

I tend to prefer a single pattern on a set of placemats - or at least a coherent one; so:
- outline or solid wording, with pattern filling in circles and clear background
- outline or solid wording, with clear circles and pattern filled background
- pattern-filled wording, with clear circles and clear or same/related pattern background

So, for example, when a pattern is used in the background (rays, diagonals, spirals, sperm and others) I prefer empty circles; or vice versa. Matching background and text-fill can be good (complementary might also work well).

Where a pattern is used to fill the circle, it should not also fill the text, which should then be clear or solid; noting this is as per your Messias example above, but not always per previous placemats.

Am not keen on gray-and-pattern-filled text (such as flowers example, or stars example), nor black-and-pattern filled text.

[jdaw1]

I tend to prefer a single pattern on a set of placemats - or at least a coherent one; so:
- outline or solid wording, with pattern filling in circles and clear background
- outline or solid wording, with clear circles and pattern filled background
- pattern-filled wording, with clear circles and clear or same/related pattern background

Please post some examples (the dates would suffice) of near-fails and only-just-successes.

Reminder: many many placemats shown at the list of placemats.

Thank you.

[jdaw1]

Placemats created.

My bugs, or yours? (E.g., spacing in Circlearrays. E.g., the table of contents has a link to the log page, but there isn’t a log page — was it removed in a post-process rather than by /OutputLogToPage false def? Please send me the code.)


This post moved by jdaw1 from its organisation thread, re Tue 28 Jan 2020.

[flash_uk]

Placemats created.

My bugs, or yours? (E.g., spacing in Circlearrays. E.g., the table of contents has a link to the log page, but there isn’t a log page — was it removed in a post-process rather than by /OutputLogToPage false def? Please send me the code.)

I noticed both the spacing thing, and the lack of log page. Will email the .ps.

The spacing thing I think is my doing. I think I used initials in more than one circlearrays field.


This post moved by jdaw1 from its organisation thread, re Tue 28 Jan 2020.

[jdaw1]

Score one each.

Code: Select all

/Circlearrays [
	[ (NAC) () (NAC) ]
	[ (IDJ) () (IDJ) ]
	[ (MPM) () (MPM) ]
	[ (Dagger) () (Dagger) ]
	[ (Double Dagger) () (Double Dagger) ]
] def

The empty strings explain the weird gaps.

But the absence of a log page was a failure of the author of the code to realise that there was a difference in behaviour between Adobe Distiller and Ghostscript. Fixed. Apologies.

[flash_uk]

The empty strings explain the weird gaps.

Sackcloth and ashes. This requires some adaptation to the wizard coding, to cope with blank fields. I will get round to that, but not at the pace with which you fixed the log page matter.

[jdaw1]

Next question, is about branding, but likely as not the most consistent usage is in the software and its output.

Are we PascalCase (www.ThePortForum.com) or camelCase (www.thePortForum.com)? Current usage is PascalCase; but there would be less need for kerning with camelCase.

Currently we use PascalCase:

Preference? Comment?

[flash_uk]

I prefer PascalCase, as it reinforces the often used acronym TPF. Where would the kerning difference happen with camelCase? Around the first dot?

[jdaw1]

Yes: “.T” needs kerning; “.t” doesnʼt, or at least, it matters much less.

[jdaw1]

During the Emergency at 67 Pall Mall on 25 February 2020, Neil, and perhaps others, asked that the parameter NeckTagsHoleRadius be larger. Currently its default is 42.52pt ≈ 15mm, so a diameter of 3cm. What size is wanted?

Suggestion: 54pt = 19.05mm, so a diameter of 38.1mm. Comment?

[jdaw1]

Suggestion: 54pt = 19.05mm, so a diameter of 38.1mm. Comment?

No comment, so done. If there is later disagreement, it can be undone.

[jdaw1]

I’ve decided that the code should exist in a proper repository, to allow submission and discussion of issues, to allow others to contribute to the PostScript, and for better death-proofing. Hence ∃ github.com/jdaw1/placemat.

Two issues ask a question of GitHub experts (Software licence; Documentation: HTML or Markdown or other?). If you can answer, please do.

[jdaw1]

The move to GitHub is complete. If you have published links to this software, please update them to:
• http://github.com/jdaw1/placemat/
• http://github.com/jdaw1/placemat/blob/m ... lacemat.ps
• http://raw.githubusercontent.com/jdaw1/ ... lacemat.ps
as appropriate.

[jdaw1]

Do any programmers know whether there would be sufficient advantages in moving my code to SourceForge.net? My prior is ‘no’, but I’m willing to be persuaded otherwise.

In perusing this thread for outstanding issues, this was seen.

[jdaw1]

This thread was once the discussion place for the placemat software: where requests were made and bugs reported. That place is now github.com/jdaw1/placemat/issues/. Indeed, it has been more than 1½ years since somebody other than me posted in this thread.

It is currently an ‘Announcement’ thread, meaning that it is in a separate section at the top of the list of threads. It is being demoted to a ‘Standard Topic’. Git-phobes may still use it for the old purposes, but henceforth this thread will be less visible.

[PhilW]

Indeed, it has been more than 1½ years since somebody other than me posted in this thread.

There is, perhaps, a reason for this - being the rather reduced number of tastings held in the last 18 months due to circumstances (as well as other factors such as code maturity etc, per your point).

[jdaw1]

Everybody loves a pork pie tasting.



These pork-pie placemats were made by an abuse of the parameters, and there is discussion about whether their production should be regularised. Comment welcome, ideally in issue 153.