On 8/27/07, Amit Kumar Saha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello all,
> On 8/27/07, Øyvind Kolås <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > According to the plan GEGL will replace all code in the GIMP that is
> > accessing and or modifying pixels, some forms of GIMP plug-ins will
> > most likely be entirely replaced by GEGL plug-ins instead. And as
> > mentioned elsewhere in this thread, GEGL plug-ins can either be
> > descriptions of graphs, or actual C code. Another option that should
> > already be possible if someone is thus inclined, is actually to write
> > a GIMP plug-in for GIMP 2.4 that allows GEGL plug-ins to be used
> > directly by current versions of GIMP, this is less interesting than
> > another bridge that will have to be written, which is a wrapper for
> > (at least some of) the exisitng GIMP plug-ins to work from within
> > GEGL, this will be needed to provide legacy support for
> > some of the older plug-ins (these plug-ins will thus still work, but
> > have limitations wrt bit-depth and such).
> My current work at hand will possibly require me to write a plugin for
> GIMP (current version) which will use GEGL for its image processing
> operations. So if I proceed, I shall let the list know.
> Here a couple of more queries:
> 1. Does any of the developers here have some demo C code which takes
> in a XML file specification of the operations and performs the image
> processing tasks using GEGEL?
The gegl binary found in the gegl/bin/gegl.c does just this, it can
even be compiled without support for the GTK+ GUI which makes almost
all the logic of processing happen in gegl.c, please do note that the
format of the XML is not a finalized part of the interface to GEGL,
and that there are some parts that are not even implemented yet. (The
ability to specify a operation as a graph, stored as XML for instance,
right now such meta operations need to be written directly in C which
is a bit cumbersome for rapid prototyping.)
> 2. Can I assume safely that most of the image processing operations
> are "applying the same operation" to each pixel of the image?
I do not understand what you mean by this question. It might also be
an idea to take this discussion to the GEGL mailing list instead of
continuing it here.
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»
-- William Gibson
Gimp-developer mailing list