Assumptions: When I load an image from a file I'm getting a platform/native optimized implementation. When I create a BufferedImage I get an all-Java implementation. Questions: What are the speed and memory tradeoffs between the two implementations? Would saving dynamically create images (using BufferedImage ) to disk and then reading them back as native images give me better memory/speed performance in the long run? Thanks --- Ted =========================================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "signoff JAVA2D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
