Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.10 very slow

[Patrick Shanahan]

* Rick Strong  [05-13-18 15:01]:
> Not to dismiss your experience, mine is different:
> 
> GIMP 2.10.0 opens in about 7~8 seconds (first opening of the day; subsequent
> openings are faster).
> The "Export As" dialogue opens in 4 sec. Ram usage is about 2.07 GB, 26%.
> WIN 7 64 Pro, SP 1, 8GB RAM
> 
> My initial install experience with 2.10.0 was bad. It opened *very* slowly
> and then wouldn't open at all.
> - I uninstalled 2.10.0.
> - I uninstalled 2.8.16 (which supposedly had been uninstalled or
> overwritten).
> - I installed 2.10 to **a brand new folder.**
> - It runs like a charm (so far).
> 
> Might be worth a try.
> 
> Rick S.
> 
> -Original Message- From: wireless112
> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 9:53 PM
> To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> Cc: notificati...@gimpusers.com
> Subject: [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.10 very slow
> 
> Slow I think is too generous. I would say 486 about describes the
> performance.
> Win 10 64. TR 1950x, 32 GB RAM, 2 R7 370's.
> 
> We're talking a minute waiting for export dialogs to finally become visible,
> and
> when they do a majority of the time they aren't on the foreground. You have
> to
> go hunting.
> 
> I had 2.8 on my previous build, no problems whatsoever. My previous build
> was a
> FX8350 with 24GB of RAM. Same video.
> 
> 2.8 = Lamborghini Aventador SV
> 
> 2.10 = Ford Pinto
> 
> That's with 8 GB more RAM, 8 more cores, and 16 additional threads.  And a
> whole
> bunch of additional PCIe lanes. Source material on nvm's vs platters. I
> surely
> wasn't expecting this slow.  I am going to reinstall 2.8 now.
> 
> At this point I am just basically saying me too. Not expecting assistance on
> a
> work around, I'll try the next version when it comes out.
> 
> Also 2.10 is a RAM pig.

on my openSUSE Tumbleweed gimp 2.10 opens in < 4 seconds and uses < 80 mb
of memory w/o swap, while darktable utilizes 182 mb of memory.

-- 
(paka)Patrick Shanahan   Plainfield, Indiana, USA  @ptilopteri
http://en.opensuse.orgopenSUSE Community Memberfacebook/ptilopteri
Registered Linux User #207535@ http://linuxcounter.net
Photos: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/piwigo   paka @ IRCnet freenode
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.10 and exif-information

[Ken Moffat via gimp-user-list]

Whoops, managed to reply to Johann instead of to the list, and then
I got the list address wrong.  Not a good day, but lemme give it
another try before I sack myself.

On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0200, Johann Spies wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:11:32PM +0100, Ken Moffat via gimp-user-list 
> wrote> I've edited EXIF information in a png created from gimp-2.{8,9}
> > after importing from {,n}ufraw, using Image::ExifTool in a bash script
> > to add and remove fields.
> 
> I do not want to use ExifTool in this case.  My problem is that I open
> an image with a lot of exif-information in Gimp and when Gimp exports
> it, those information is lost.  How can I prevent Gimp from doing it?
> 

That does not match my current experience with 2.10.0 - I have just
opened a raw image as 16-bit in Gimp (using nufraw), straightened it up
and sharpened it, then exported as png (16-bit) and tiff (seems to
be 32-bit).

I than used exiftool -a on each, with similar results.  Some of the
output from the tiff file:

ExifTool Version Number : 10.80
File Name   : p8272328-timetable.tif
Directory   : photos/bergstrecke
File Size   : 76 MB
File Modification Date/Time : 2018:05:13 21:02:27+01:00
...
File Type   : TIFF
File Type Extension : tif
MIME Type   : image/tiff
Exif Byte Order : Little-endian (Intel, II)
Processing Software : nUFRaw 0.41
Subfile Type: Full-resolution Image
Image Width : 2560
Image Height: 1930
Bits Per Sample : 32 32 32 32
Compression : Uncompressed
Photometric Interpretation  : RGB
...
Image Description   : OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Make: OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model Name   : E-510
...
Software: GIMP 2.10.0
Modify Date : 2018:05:13 21:02:24
Subfile Type: Reduced-resolution image
Image Width : 256
Image Height: 193
...
Exposure Time   : 1/60
F Number: 4.5
Exposure Program: Program AE
ISO : 200
Exif Version: 0221
Date/Time Original  : 2011:08:27 11:13:12
--- lots more snipped ---

So it has the EXIF data, and also a 256x193 thumbnail.

> > My current process re-reads EXIF data from
> > the camera's own jpeg.
> 
> I do not take photos in jpeg.  Work with raw mostly with Darktable but
> there are time when I want to edit a photo in Gimp.
> 
I take both - for what I'm doing, the jpeg usually gives me a quick
look on a computer where I can say "has possibilities | meh"

> > Not sure platform you are working on, but perhaps you can do
> > something similar.  And in general things change over 12 years!
> 
> It seems that the information about Gimp not giving back the
> Exif-information has not changed that much in 12 year... :(
> 

Documentation is either free, and can be updated, or it is chained
down in immutable form and may be out of date.

ĸen
-- 
This email was written using 300% recycled letters.
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

Re: [Gimp-user] [Gimp-developer] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Ofnuts]

On 05/13/18 19:12, Michael Schumacher wrote:

On 05/13/2018 06:54 PM, Ofnuts wrote:


Another reason is that it is not in Windows users' mentality (and
perhaps in non-programmers' mentality) to report bugs... Consider things
broken and abandon silently, often, whine in forums, sometimes, but
report bugs, never.  And it's not only with Gimp... Maybe we should find
a middle ground between the useless "It's broken, fix it" and the
intimidating formality of the bug report on Bugzilla.

You mean "people", not "Windows users". Being able to describe anything
in a way that is easy to understand is an acquired skill.

The middle ground is already there - there are regulars on every list
and forum with experience in the tools involved, and they can make it
their task to convert "it is broken!"-type message into useful bug
reports, or refer to existing ones.


A recent example would be

https://old.reddit.com/r/GIMP/comments/8ixiij/annoying_bugs_in_2100_with_selection_tools/

which resulted in the following two new bug reports:

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=796071
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=796073


Also that one: 
https://www.gimp-forum.net/Thread-Text-Along-Path-Problem--1988


that became: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=796021

Still, a rather small team of regulars.

___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.10 very slow

[Rick Strong]

An interesting variable:
- My first download was from the GIMP direct download site.
- My second download of 2.10.0 was from a mirror site.
Who knows? I think cleaning out remnants of 2.8 16 and putting 2.10.0 in a 
new folder did the trick.


Rick S.

-Original Message- 
From: Rick Strong

Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2018 3:00 PM
To: wireless112 ; gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Cc: notificati...@gimpusers.com
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.10 very slow

Not to dismiss your experience, mine is different:

GIMP 2.10.0 opens in about 7~8 seconds (first opening of the day; subsequent
openings are faster).
The "Export As" dialogue opens in 4 sec. Ram usage is about 2.07 GB, 26%.
WIN 7 64 Pro, SP 1, 8GB RAM

My initial install experience with 2.10.0 was bad. It opened *very* slowly
and then wouldn't open at all.
- I uninstalled 2.10.0.
- I uninstalled 2.8.16 (which supposedly had been uninstalled or
overwritten).
- I installed 2.10 to **a brand new folder.**
- It runs like a charm (so far).

Might be worth a try.

Rick S.

-Original Message- 
From: wireless112

Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 9:53 PM
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Cc: notificati...@gimpusers.com
Subject: [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.10 very slow

Slow I think is too generous. I would say 486 about describes the
performance.
Win 10 64. TR 1950x, 32 GB RAM, 2 R7 370's.

We're talking a minute waiting for export dialogs to finally become visible,
and
when they do a majority of the time they aren't on the foreground. You have
to
go hunting.

I had 2.8 on my previous build, no problems whatsoever. My previous build
was a
FX8350 with 24GB of RAM. Same video.

2.8 = Lamborghini Aventador SV

2.10 = Ford Pinto

That's with 8 GB more RAM, 8 more cores, and 16 additional threads.  And a
whole
bunch of additional PCIe lanes. Source material on nvm's vs platters. I
surely
wasn't expecting this slow.  I am going to reinstall 2.8 now.

At this point I am just basically saying me too. Not expecting assistance on
a
work around, I'll try the next version when it comes out.

Also 2.10 is a RAM pig.

--
wireless112 (via www.gimpusers.com/forums)
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list 


___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.10 very slow

[Rick Strong]

Not to dismiss your experience, mine is different:

GIMP 2.10.0 opens in about 7~8 seconds (first opening of the day; subsequent 
openings are faster).

The "Export As" dialogue opens in 4 sec. Ram usage is about 2.07 GB, 26%.
WIN 7 64 Pro, SP 1, 8GB RAM

My initial install experience with 2.10.0 was bad. It opened *very* slowly 
and then wouldn't open at all.

- I uninstalled 2.10.0.
- I uninstalled 2.8.16 (which supposedly had been uninstalled or 
overwritten).

- I installed 2.10 to **a brand new folder.**
- It runs like a charm (so far).

Might be worth a try.

Rick S.

-Original Message- 
From: wireless112

Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 9:53 PM
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Cc: notificati...@gimpusers.com
Subject: [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.10 very slow

Slow I think is too generous. I would say 486 about describes the 
performance.

Win 10 64. TR 1950x, 32 GB RAM, 2 R7 370's.

We're talking a minute waiting for export dialogs to finally become visible, 
and
when they do a majority of the time they aren't on the foreground. You have 
to

go hunting.

I had 2.8 on my previous build, no problems whatsoever. My previous build 
was a

FX8350 with 24GB of RAM. Same video.

2.8 = Lamborghini Aventador SV

2.10 = Ford Pinto

That's with 8 GB more RAM, 8 more cores, and 16 additional threads.  And a 
whole
bunch of additional PCIe lanes. Source material on nvm's vs platters. I 
surely

wasn't expecting this slow.  I am going to reinstall 2.8 now.

At this point I am just basically saying me too. Not expecting assistance on 
a

work around, I'll try the next version when it comes out.

Also 2.10 is a RAM pig.

--
wireless112 (via www.gimpusers.com/forums)
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list 


___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

Re: [Gimp-user] [Gimp-developer] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Michael Schumacher]

On 05/13/2018 06:54 PM, Ofnuts wrote:

> Another reason is that it is not in Windows users' mentality (and
> perhaps in non-programmers' mentality) to report bugs... Consider things
> broken and abandon silently, often, whine in forums, sometimes, but
> report bugs, never.  And it's not only with Gimp... Maybe we should find
> a middle ground between the useless "It's broken, fix it" and the
> intimidating formality of the bug report on Bugzilla.

You mean "people", not "Windows users". Being able to describe anything
in a way that is easy to understand is an acquired skill.

The middle ground is already there - there are regulars on every list
and forum with experience in the tools involved, and they can make it
their task to convert "it is broken!"-type message into useful bug
reports, or refer to existing ones.


A recent example would be

https://old.reddit.com/r/GIMP/comments/8ixiij/annoying_bugs_in_2100_with_selection_tools/

which resulted in the following two new bug reports:

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=796071
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=796073


-- 
Regards,
Michael
GPG: 96A8 B38A 728A 577D 724D 60E5 F855 53EC B36D 4CDD
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

Re: [Gimp-user] [Gimp-developer] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Ofnuts]

On 05/11/18 16:35, Kevin Payne wrote:

On 05/11/2018 09:06 AM, Elle Stone wrote:


Are some/many/most of the problems being reported for GIMP-2.10 on
Windows, only specific to Windows?

Or are these bug reports by Windows users simply bugs that weren't
detected by various people running GIMP-2.9/GIMP-2.10-rc/GIMP-2.10 on
Linux?

I'd suggest that one of the reasons is the relative lack of availability of 
executables during the 2.9 development 
phase - self compilation not 
really being an option on Windows.


Another reason is that it is not in Windows users' mentality (and 
perhaps in non-programmers' mentality) to report bugs... Consider things 
broken and abandon silently, often, whine in forums, sometimes, but 
report bugs, never.  And it's not only with Gimp... Maybe we should find 
a middle ground between the useless "It's broken, fix it" and the 
intimidating formality of the bug report on Bugzilla.

___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

[Gimp-user] Gimp 2.10 very slow

[wireless112]

Slow I think is too generous. I would say 486 about describes the performance. 
Win 10 64. TR 1950x, 32 GB RAM, 2 R7 370's.

We're talking a minute waiting for export dialogs to finally become visible, and
when they do a majority of the time they aren't on the foreground. You have to
go hunting.

I had 2.8 on my previous build, no problems whatsoever. My previous build was a
FX8350 with 24GB of RAM. Same video.

2.8 = Lamborghini Aventador SV

2.10 = Ford Pinto

That's with 8 GB more RAM, 8 more cores, and 16 additional threads.  And a whole
bunch of additional PCIe lanes. Source material on nvm's vs platters. I surely
wasn't expecting this slow.  I am going to reinstall 2.8 now.

At this point I am just basically saying me too. Not expecting assistance on a
work around, I'll try the next version when it comes out.

Also 2.10 is a RAM pig.   

-- 
wireless112 (via www.gimpusers.com/forums)
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

Re: [Gimp-user] [Gimp-developer] Curious about GIMP-2.10 bugs on Windows

[Kevin Payne]

On 05/11/2018 09:06 AM, Elle Stone wrote:

> Are some/many/most of the problems being reported for GIMP-2.10 on
> Windows, only specific to Windows?
>
> Or are these bug reports by Windows users simply bugs that weren't
> detected by various people running GIMP-2.9/GIMP-2.10-rc/GIMP-2.10 on
> Linux?

I'd suggest that one of the reasons is the relative lack of availability of 
executables during the 2.9 development 
phase - self compilation not 
really being an option on Windows.

___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list