Hi Frankie,
On 21 Nov 10 10:56 Frank1e said:
> The image is a photo with
> a resolution of 72.000 x 72.000 pixels and is 416mm x 624mm. The
> layer i am working on is print size (147mm x 105mm),
You misunderstand the nature of the resolution figure.
There's nothing fixed about it. It's simpl
i wonder if anyone can help me? i have searched the forum for a previously
posted solution and i have not been able to find one so sorry in advance if
this issue has already been addressed.
I am trying to create a post card for print and have an image prepared to copy
on to an existing layer.
When downsizing a large image like 150MB to about 50MB I get a warning
message that the image size will be 102MB, do you want to continue.
(Twice the actual size)
--
Best Regards
Thomas J Spuhler
All Tusonix outgoing e-mail has been scanned for viruses
signature.asc
Description: This is a digi
Hi,
Thomas Spuhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When downsizing a large image like 150MB to about 50MB I get a warning
> message that the image size will be 102MB, do you want to continue.
> (Twice the actual size)
The warning message is correct but I admit that it is confusing. GIMP
takes the
http://www.d-contest.com/sum_02/week_04/flower0375xats.jpg
This is a beautiful photo--and only 640 X 480. But it is 250K jpg.
I loaded it up in GIMP, and did a save, but instead of doing the default
jpg settings, if I uncheck optimize, and change the subsampling to 4:2:2 I
can get the ima
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 08:42:51AM +, sam ende wrote:
> On Thursday 09 January 2003 04:02, Jon Winters wrote:
>
> > Check the settings on your tile cache. Mine is set to 128MB and I think
> > the default was a woefull 32MB.
>
> cache is set to 256, i wanted to do more but it wouldn't let me,
On Thursday 09 January 2003 03:36, Fred Bazolo wrote:
> from sam ende, Thu, 9 Jan 2003 01:42:19 +:
>
> When my file gets to be about 100 megs in size, it is hard to get any work
> done.
yes, so i end up copying visable and paste as new to work on that, that also
helps with the undo, cos its
On Thursday 09 January 2003 02:10, Fred Bazolo wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 January 2003 20:42, sam ende wrote:
>
> What do you call a large image?
one that slows doen my machine, of course. :)
k6/2+500 processor and 440mb memory
sammi
___
Gimp-user maili
On Thursday 09 January 2003 04:02, Jon Winters wrote:
> How large are your large images? I can toss 2MB (JPEG) 2560x1920 images
> around all day and my computer doesn't miss a tick.
4000x5 0r 6, its the layers that make it big, sometimes i have 10 or more
layers. xcf not jpeg, same image a
maybe Tor or someone else will complete the port by the time I
confirm that other applications can't get the job done either...
s/KAM
- Original Message -
From: "Fred Bazolo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Gimp User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, Janua
from sam ende, Thu, 9 Jan 2003 01:42:19 +:
"it seems is a problem with gimp.
large images slow down my machine quite a bit, somtimes to the point of
impractabilty, but they are sizes not so untypical of people who need to make
prints of their graphics.
now i'm hesitant to recommend gimp to
it seems is a problem with gimp.
large images slow down my machine quite a bit, somtimes to the point of
impractabilty, but they are sizes not so untypical of people who need to make
prints of their graphics.
now i'm hesitant to recommend gimp to people who i know tend to need print
quality gr
12 matches
Mail list logo
