On approximately 3/29/2007 4:31 PM, came the following
characters from
the keyboard of omicronpersei8 imagemagick.org:
>> Has any thought been given to having a Q1 version
of ImageMagick?
>
> None. Q1 support would require a complete rewrite of
almost every algorithm
> in ImageMagick. We have been working toward supporting
a floating point
> version which requires very few changes to the source.
Some folks need
> floating point to support high dymanic range images.
Clearly the floating point version will be useful. Of
course, bitonal
can also represent high dynamic range images... but not the
gradations
between!
I'm surprised that Q1 would require a rewrite of so many
algorithms.
While I can see that it would probably limit the usefulness
of some of
the algorithms, why would any of them cease to function?
And simple
operations like crop and resize would seem like they should
not only
continue to work, but also be useful.
On the other hand, I'm realizing that QN refers to bits per
channel, and
there are 3 or 4 channels in most formats... but what I
really meant by
Q1 was bitonal, one channel, two colors, and I guess Q1
would be 3 or 4
channels, 1 bit depths, which would allow for 8 or 16
colors... So I
didn't really ask the question I intended to, although I did
mention
bitonal, so you probably interpreted the question correctly
anyway.
Anyway, there are a large number of bitonal images out there
that would
benefit from faster handling by ImageMagick, but I realize
that
ImageMagick cannot be all things to all people... it is a
whole bunch of
stuff to a whole bunch of people, and I'm using the Q8
version quite
effectively to process bitonal images, but it requires
excessive
resources to do so, so some of my programs runs slowly on
other people's
machines that have more limited RAM than mine.
I was just assuming and hoping that it would be an easy
thing to
support, and it just hadn't occurred to you developers to
support it...
and was even thinking that with a few tips from you, that
maybe I could
try my hand at making such a thing... but your initial
response
certainly doesn't encourage that.
--
Glenn -- http://nevcal.com/
===========================
A protocol is complete when there is nothing left to
remove.
-- Stuart Cheshire, Apple Computer, regarding Zero
Configuration Networking
_______________________________________________
Magick-users mailing list
Magick-usersimagemagick.org
http://studio.imagemagick.org/mailman/listinfo/magick
-users
|
