> So, maybe the disctinction will be still necessary when GIMP 2.10 is out --
> however, the existing Gaussian blur GEGL plug-in does not offer any
> choice in algorithm
A choice in algorithm is however made internally. The choice depends
on the radius of the blur.
___
On 31 August 2012 22:11, Liam R E Quin wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:49 +0200, gg wrote:
>
>> "With modern computers" argument is countered by "on modern images". As
>> the hardware gets faster the images also get bigger ( in both x and y) .
>> As gimp progresses to higher bit resolutions any
On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:49 +0200, gg wrote:
> "With modern computers" argument is countered by "on modern images". As
> the hardware gets faster the images also get bigger ( in both x and y) .
> As gimp progresses to higher bit resolutions any difference may become
> more relevant not less.
I
On 30 August 2012 01:11, scl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently working out a GUI brainstorm idea for the Gaussian and
> Tileable Blur dialogs. Both dialogs let the user choose between the
> algorithms IIR and RLE. The documentation says, IIR is faster on
> photographs, RLE faster on drawings. I've ne
On 08/30/12 06:11, scl wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently working out a GUI brainstorm idea for the Gaussian and
Tileable Blur dialogs. Both dialogs let the user choose between the
algorithms IIR and RLE. The documentation says, IIR is faster on
photographs, RLE faster on drawings. I've never found a diff
Hi,
I'm currently working out a GUI brainstorm idea for the Gaussian and
Tileable Blur dialogs. Both dialogs let the user choose between the
algorithms IIR and RLE. The documentation says, IIR is faster on
photographs, RLE faster on drawings. I've never found a difference in
computing time be
