On 23 Apr 2004, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> David Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > Photoshop handles large images better than GIMP. That's a known
> > > fact and it's not trivial to improve.
> >
> > How, exactly?
>
> AFAIK they don't load the full image into memory. If you open a large
Hi,
David Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Photoshop handles large images better than GIMP. That's a known
> > fact and it's not trivial to improve.
>
> How, exactly? I've heard this too, but I have no clear idea how
> they do so - do they have a similar caching system, and just make
> bett
Kevin Myers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > Photoshop handles large images better than GIMP. That's a known fact
> > > and it's not trivial to improve.
>
> Ummm, well that known fact isn't completely true. In actual fact, Photoshop
> will *not* handle many of the large images that we work with a
> > Photoshop handles large images better than GIMP. That's a known fact
> > and it's not trivial to improve.
Ummm, well that known fact isn't completely true. In actual fact, Photoshop
will *not* handle many of the large images that we work with at all, whereas
the GIMP will do so with no proble
Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
> > On PotatoShop (forced to used at gunpoint), there are no problems
> > editing this image or other large images.
>
> Photoshop handles large images better than GIMP. That's a known fact
> and it's not trivial to improve.
How, exactly? I've heard this too, but I have no
