Hi Larry,
thanks for your efforts
Peppe
--- Larry Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> I think I see the problem. 3800 x 3800 x 4 = 57 MB.
> JUMP uses image
> buffers for large layers, one for each layer with
> over 100 features, plus
> there is Swing double buffering. So if you had 3
> la
I think I see the problem. 3800 x 3800 x 4 = 57 MB. JUMP uses image
buffers for large layers, one for each layer with over 100 features, plus
there is Swing double buffering. So if you had 3 large layers, it would
take over 400 MB just to draw the image. For 6 it would almost 800 MB.
I was abl
I'll need more details in order to reproduce the problem. The raster layers
in OpenJump are probably the issue. SkyJUMP supports only a few raster
implementations that we have coded ourselves. OpenJump supports many
different, each with their own advantages and disadvantages.
Try it with only v
Hi all and Larry,
I tested the new "export view to Image" with the new
implementations to set the resolution.
I tried to exporte an image (with raster and vectors
layers) with the maximun resolution 3800, both with
OpenJUMP and SKyJUMP and compare the time and the
output.
After a good 60 secon
