Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp's rendering speeds

2011-02-03 Thread Sven Neumann
On Wed, 2011-02-02 at 15:32 +0200, Jeremy Nell wrote:

 Speaking of which, I am using an i7 PC with 3 gigs of RAM allocated to 
 Gimp alone, so I'm not sure how to make Gimp's response time any quicker.

What exactly do you mean when you say that you allocated 3 gigs of RAM
to GIMP? Did you increase the tile-cache size in GIMP to 3 GB or do you
just have 3 GB of RAM that GIMP could use if you allowed it to do that
(by increasing the tile-cache size appropriately)?

Just asking to make sure that there isn't a misunderstanding...


Sven


___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user


Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp's rendering speeds

2011-02-03 Thread Jeremy Nell
I currently have 6 gigs of DDR3 RAM in my PC.  I increased Gimp's 
tile-cache size to 3 gigs, and left number of processors at 8 (as well 
as everything else).



On 04/02/2011 00:28, Sven Neumann wrote:

On Wed, 2011-02-02 at 15:32 +0200, Jeremy Nell wrote:


Speaking of which, I am using an i7 PC with 3 gigs of RAM allocated to
Gimp alone, so I'm not sure how to make Gimp's response time any quicker.

What exactly do you mean when you say that you allocated 3 gigs of RAM
to GIMP? Did you increase the tile-cache size in GIMP to 3 GB or do you
just have 3 GB of RAM that GIMP could use if you allowed it to do that
(by increasing the tile-cache size appropriately)?

Just asking to make sure that there isn't a misunderstanding...


Sven


___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user


Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp's rendering speeds

2011-02-02 Thread peter kostov
On 02/02/2011 03:32 PM, Jeremy Nell wrote:
 I've asked this before, with no answers.  My aim, as a happy Gimp user,
 is not to slate the software, but to improve it.  I am not a developer,
 but rather a digital artist who uses Gimp extensively.

 Working on large canvases, I see that Gimp slows down, where rendering
 is concerned.  For example, if I have a complex artwork and I want to
 hide certain layers, then a simple click on the eye icon in the layer
 takes a lot longer than it should.  As much as developers hate
 comparisons, this simple task is generally quicker in Photoshop.

 Another obvious problem is that, again, on a large canvas (A4 and up,
 300DPI), the brushes - when increased in scale - lag behind the mouse /
 stylus.  This indicates to me that Gimp's rendering engine could be
 quicker.  Again, I've compared the exact same task in Photoshop (CS3)
 and it is considerably quicker (even with less RAM) allocated to it.

 Speaking of which, I am using an i7 PC with 3 gigs of RAM allocated to
 Gimp alone, so I'm not sure how to make Gimp's response time any quicker.

 Will the next release of Gimp be a bit quicker?  And what tips can
 anyone give?

Same here,

I would like some advice on this too :)

Regards,
Petar
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user


Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp's rendering speeds

2011-02-02 Thread Martin Nordholts
On 02/02/2011 02:32 PM, Jeremy Nell wrote:
 Will the next release of Gimp be a bit quicker?

I'm afraid not; the next release of GIMP, GIMP 2.8, will not be quicker 
in this regard.

The release after that, GIMP 3.0, will focus on running on GTK 3.0 and 
bringing high bit depths into the picture.

3.2 will focus on non-destructiveness

Maybe in 3.4 we'll have time to solve this in a proper way.

  / Martin


-- 

My GIMP Blog:
http://www.chromecode.com/
Nightly GIMP, GEGL, babl tarball builds
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user


Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp's rendering speeds

2011-02-02 Thread Jeremy Nell
This is good to hear.  Rendering speed is important, especially if Gimp 
wants to be a viable competitor to the mainstream counterparts, where 
man-sized canvasses are concerned.



On 03/02/2011 03:18, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:

On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Martin Nordholtsense...@gmail.com  wrote:

On 02/02/2011 02:32 PM, Jeremy Nell wrote:

Will the next release of Gimp be a bit quicker?

I'm afraid not; the next release of GIMP, GIMP 2.8, will not be quicker
in this regard.

The release after that, GIMP 3.0, will focus on running on GTK 3.0 and
bringing high bit depths into the picture.

3.2 will focus on non-destructiveness

Maybe in 3.4 we'll have time to solve this in a proper way.


Actually, this may well be solved for GIMP 3.0 - as it will them most
depend on GEGL improvements.
Pippin has detailed the improvements that could be done on GEGL with
regards to speed rendering in a document he posted on Tuesday (I don't
remember if it was to this list):
mostly improvements that would allow the image viewport to be real
time rendered, while the real rendering would happen in background.

   js
   --


  / Martin


--

My GIMP Blog:
http://www.chromecode.com/
Nightly GIMP, GEGL, babl tarball builds
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user


___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user