Addressing engraving criticisms from Orchestration Challenge 2020
[Corrected the post and upload to correct mistakes @SteveBlower observed]
As per @Marc Sabatella's suggestion here (https://musescore.org/en/node/307368#comment-1010670), I'm starting a new thread around improving the look of my orchestral score for Orchestration Challenge 2020, using what exists in MuseScore 3.4.1.
I made the changes below to address concerns Thomas Goss raised (linked in the other thread). I used Justin Tokke's score (linked in other thread) to eyeball some of the spacing values. To match Justin's page layout, in my revision, I have broken the pages at the same place as Justin--that's just a choice and was not raised as an engraving concern.
My engraving changes:
1. Connected barlines in sections
2. Bracketed staves in sections
3. Music symbol font: Bravura
4. Music text font: Bravura text [I'm not sure where this gets used, actually]
5. Font for all but one text style: Century Schoolbook. I left Roman Numeral Analysis as is.
6. Instrument Name: Offset X: 1.00 sp.
7. Shared staves named like Flute 1, 2 instead of 2 Flutes, replicating Justin's layout.
8. Separate instruments for Horn 1, 2; Horn 3, 4 replicating Justin's layout.
9. Dynamics Y offset: 2.50sp
10. Hairpin Y offsets 2.50 and -2.50
11. Expression Text offset 2.50. [Bug? They still come in at 3.50]
12. Staff text Y Offset: -1.00sp
13. Slurs/Ties, Line thickness middle: .25sp
14. Defined User Style "Tempo 2" with same font and offsets as Tempo
15. Added duplicate tempo indications above the string section, using my Tempo 2 style. [This feels like a hack.]
16. For the peculiarities of this layout, I increased the point size of these styles: Title, Composer, Footer
The layout is peculiar in that it is sized to be rendered in a 1920x1080 video. Having no px option for the page size, I set it to 1920x1080 mm. This seems to be what everybody does in these challenges, whatever tool they use.
I've attached my revised score. It looks better to my eyes than the original, which you see in the video I linked to the other thread. I have attempted to make these changes primarily with styles and minimum local overrides.
I did do local overrides on expression text. I moved the Y offset of all expression text manually to 2.50sp since the setting in Format Styles had no effect. I also adjusted the X offset for expression text attached to the same note as dynamics. Rather than having them stack vertically to avoid collision, I pushed the expression to the right. I'm not sure if that's a proper call but it looks better to me.
I have reached the limit of my own taste and education on these matters. What else needs to be done with engraving standards to convey a professional look to this score?