Thomas E Deweese wrote: [deleted stuff...]
> This is exactly what the StaticRenderer does. The transcoders > really shouldn't use the StaticRenderer (they should work at a lower > level) but I didn't write them and the StaticRenderer is such a simple > way to get a BufferedImage it was easier. I modified a transcoder to return directly a BufferedImage. I observed though that memory allocated somewhere in StaticRenderer (I think) is not freed. Looks like dispose() doesn't work... > That all said, for large images the last thing you want is to > create a BufferedImage. This requires the entire image to be in > memory at one time. You want to work with RenderedImages which are > tiled and demand pull, so only the parts currently being worked on are > in memory. How can I avoid this? With StaticRenderer.getOffScreen(), the image I obtain is BufferedImage. And in the meantime, inside StaticRenderer allocations are done which are not garbage-collected... > You might try passing a Graphics2D from a grayscale image into the > paint method of the GVT tree. This might work, of course for complex > content it will fail - but I don't know how widespread the failures > would be. Could you please be more precise about where to look? I can't find any GVTTree class. Felicia -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Felicia IONASCU Oc� Print Logic Technologies mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 1, rue Jean Lemoine phone : +33 (0)1 48 98 81 99 94015 Cr�teil cedex, France fax: +33 (0)1 48 98 54 50 http://www.oce.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
