On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:41:51AM -0500, Orion Vianna wrote: > File has a 12000x12000 pixel image I scanned. The original scan was > actually larger... > I think thats the resolution needed to be able to edit the file > without loosing much quality and still print at say... 45x45 > inches... > I'm trying to retain as much quality as I can so I'm able to do big prints. > > I don't think the file is really large for this type of work. > I also just bought this laptop recently and upgrade the CPU to p9700 > which has the best performance for battery life before the > T9800/T9900 and X series which consumes more battery life. > > I think only the new I7s will make much of a difference and that > will require me to buy another new machine. > > > I guess gimp works great for web work but not for large print, at > the moment...
That's freaking enormous, regardless of what platform you're using. -m > > Jim Hartley wrote: > >I agree - a 150MB image file is orders of magnitude bigger than > >what I usually work with. And the internal representation is going > >to be at least as big as the file, I believe the XCF files are > >more or less BMP files with control info. So I would EXPECT it to > >be slow. Give it as much memory as you can, and shut down > >everything else that is running so it doesn't have to do any > >swapping to disk (that used to help a lot o=when I was running on > >an older, slower, low-memory machine). > > > >Or buy a bigger, faster computer if you're going to do this a lot! > > > >Jim Hartley > > > >Sean Dague wrote: > >>On 12/16/2009 01:18 AM, Orion Vianna wrote: > >>>Hello, > >>> > >>>I'm having problems with gimp and image files of 150mb and larger - psd > >>>and tiff format (I haven't tried others). > >>>Gimp is taking a couple of seconds to show the selection from the > >>>eclipse tool for example. Moving a layer is real slow & most other > >>>operations takes a long time to render. I disabled compiz but the > >>>problem persists. > >>> > >>>My machine has 6gb ram & Intel core Duo p9700 2.8ghz. Should be enough > >>>right? I have 3gb set on title cache size on gimps preferences which > >>>improved a bit but the performance its far from being usable. > >>> > >>>Anyone knows any tricks to make gimp more responsive? a 150mb file is > >>>really not that large... > >> > >>Hmmm... I always thought 150 MB image file was huge. :) > >> > >>Have you looked at what the memory footprint of gimp is when it's > >>running with this image? > >> > >> -Sean > >> > >> > >> > >>------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Mid-Hudson Valley Linux Users Group http://mhvlug.org > >>http://mhvlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mhvlug > >> > >>Upcoming Meetings (6pm - 8pm) MHVLS Auditorium > >> Dec 2 - MythTV > >> Jan 6 - Git > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mid-Hudson Valley Linux Users Group http://mhvlug.org > http://mhvlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mhvlug > > Upcoming Meetings (6pm - 8pm) MHVLS Auditorium > Dec 2 - MythTV > Jan 6 - Git -- Mike Kershaw/Dragorn <[email protected]> GPG Fingerprint: 3546 89DF 3C9D ED80 3381 A661 D7B2 8822 738B BDB1 "Alright, Sesame Street should not be using the 'F' word."
pgpDIjvmVFh0l.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Mid-Hudson Valley Linux Users Group http://mhvlug.org http://mhvlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mhvlug Upcoming Meetings (6pm - 8pm) MHVLS Auditorium Dec 2 - MythTV Jan 6 - Git
