Greetings. In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sven Neumann wrote: >> (It was previously suggested to me that I copy the entire image and >> paste it as a new layer in the second image, and then copy between >> layers >> instead of between images. However, this is undesirable due to the >> large >> size of images I'm working with. It can take over a minute to copy the >> entire image into a new layer; I just want to be able to copy small >> areas of one image into another.) > > Are you using a clipboard daemon such as Klipper? It shouldn't take > that long to create a copy.
No, I'm not using a clipboard daemon. When you're working with huge images (24-bit 600 dpi A3 or A4 scans) and don't have the latest and greatest in hardware, then yes, it certainly can take a long time to create a copy. Keep in mind that the method proposed above more than triples the amount of memory used (100% to create the clipboard copy, plus 133% to create a new layer with alpha channel, plus who knows how much for the undo history). On a system without much RAM this can cause a lot of swapping and possibly even thrashing. Regards, Tristan -- _ _V.-o Tristan Miller [en,(fr,de,ia)] >< Space is limited / |`-' -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= <> In a haiku, so it's hard (7_\\ http://www.nothingisreal.com/ >< To finish what you _______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
