Re: [Gimp-user] Re: Environment settings big images

[Jaco Swart]

Steve Crane wrote:

Do you have any variant of Microsoft SQL Server on that machine?  SQL
Server loads as a service (i.e. when the machine starts up) and will
grab as much memory as it can.  If so, stop the SQL services and try
working with the GIMP again.  Might make a difference.
 

No... not.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

[Gimp-user] Re: Environment settings big images

[GSR - FR]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2004-04-22 at 2142.26 +0200):
   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 clear idea how
 they do so - do they have a similar caching system, and just make
 better decisions about what to cache and when? Or do they use OS
 specific features to reduce read times for caching operations?
 Or perhaps something completely different?

One thing that GIMP could do is top to bottom composing, if the blend
modes allow it. It will mean that calculations will never be worthless
and that only contributing tiles will have to be accessed. That should
speed up things and reduce memory usage in some cases.

GSR
 
___
Gimp-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

[Gimp-user] Re: Environment settings big images

[Jaco Swart]

Hi Kevin

Kevin Myers wrote:

As mentioned in my previous message, Photoshop's limit is 32K maximum pixels
in either dimension.  Your image did not exceed this limit in either
dimension.  We typically work with images that are up to several hundred
thousand pixels in one dimension, by 2 or 3 thousand pixels in the other
dimension.  Thus we almost always exceed the Photoshop limit.
 

Point taken  :-) 


I presently run GIMP 1.2.4 on a 2.4 GHz P4 based system under Windows 2000,
with 3GB of RAM installed (only 2GB of which can be used by the GIMP).  We
usually work with 8 bit grayscale images, and as described above our typical
image sizes are on the order of 200 megapixels.  As you mentioned, your
image was only 98 megapixels.  On my system, I have no problems with menu
delays at all (far less than one second response), and initial image loading
speed is reasonable, typically on the order of 5 or ten seconds.
 

Hm, mine is Gimp 1.2.5 on a 1.8GHz P4, W2K, but just 256M RAM. The Tile 
Cache is set to 128M.  In the case I described, I did have PS open at 
first, but no images loaded. After that, I closed PS and Framemaker and 
tried again - dead slow.


Based on your description, I suspect that either Photoshop's memory usage
may be somewhat more efficient than the GIMP, or possibly your Tile Cache
Size is set too small.  Either of those issues could result in extensive
page thrashing of portions of the GIMP and your image to and from disk.  On
my system, the tile cache size is set to 1280MB.  How much physical RAM do
you have, and what is your Tile Cache Size set to?
 

I would think that a 128M tile would be about right for PC... but I'll 
try suggestions :-)  Having read David's posting as well, I suspect that 
The Gimp's memory management could be fine-tuned somewhat - at least as 
far as Windows is concerned. I will repeat today's experiment on my 
Linux box tonight.

rgds
J
___
Gimp-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user