On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Marti Maria wrote:

> Hi Bob,
>
> Sure. I evaluated time ago IM readers. Found them remarkably
> superior to other similar packages, even commercial ones.
> IM was at time one of the most advanced. But I avoided that for
> many reasons, fist the profiler would be proprietary, but this was
> no so important. What decided me was the very peculiar use I should
> do with image data. I needed raw data in many places, so all the logic
> in the reader for converting to RGB was no needed at all. At that point
> I began to code the readers by myself.

Understood.  There can be many advantages from direct access,
particularly for raw or semi-raw formats like TIFF.  No offense taken.
However, what Hugh suggested was using IM/GM via the ImageMagickObject
COM object as an optional bridge to and from the formats that you
support natively.  This provides a way to multiply your inputs &
outputs while still offering value-add for the formats you support
natively.

This approach (use an installed ImageMagick or netpbm to support
additional formats) is common in the Unix world.

I think it would only take a few lines of code to enable this
capability, and everything is run-time bound so your product wouldn't
depend on it.  I expect that Hugh Brackett can provide more
implementation info.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Lcms-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lcms-user

Reply via email to