Re: Re-4: [MBS] Downsize large picture with yielding w/low memory usage?

Am 25.11.2011 um 00:50 schrieb Kev: > Hi Christian. > > How did you check the results? Was it visually or did you compare the binary > output from the two versions? I compared the PNGs from both formats and didn't see a difference. > Did you notice any performance improvements when you switch

Re: Re-4: [MBS] Downsize large picture with yielding w/low memory usage?

Hi Christian. How did you check the results? Was it visually or did you compare the binary output from the two versions? Did you notice any performance improvements when you switched to integers? Regards, Kev. - Original Message - From: Christian Schmitz To: MBS Real Studio Plugin

Re: [MBS] Downsize large picture with yielding w/low memory usage?

Am 24.11.2011 um 18:31 schrieb Michael Diehr: > Would it be possible to make the yield ticks value into a yieldMilliseconds > value instead? Or, to be more backwards compatible, how about the yieldTicks > value could be a double? Better use the MT variant in a thread. > Also - the MT - multi

Re: [MBS] Downsize large picture with yielding w/low memory usage?

On Nov 23, 2011, at 7:59 AM, Christian Schmitz wrote: > > Am 22.11.2011 um 17:30 schrieb Michael Diehr: > >> * does not require tons of memory > > I'll reduce the Scaling method memory need. > > For some reason we used doubles there and now I simply use UInt8 which > reduces memory requiremen

Re: Re-4: [MBS] Downsize large picture with yielding w/low memory usage?

Am 24.11.2011 um 12:55 schrieb MGE Info: >> I did some comparisons and it looks like it doesn't have a visible effect. >> But please test when the next pr is available. > Wouldnt it be moreexisting code friendly, to add a Parameter using old and > new behavior? > In my case there would be to muc

Re-4: [MBS] Downsize large picture with yielding w/low memory usage?

> I did some comparisons and it looks like it doesn't have a visible effect. > But please test when the next pr is available. Wouldnt it be moreexisting code friendly, to add a Parameter using old and new behavior? In my case there would be to much to test. Thomas __

Re: Re-2: [MBS] Downsize large picture with yielding w/low memory usage?

Am 24.11.2011 um 12:25 schrieb MGE Info: > Christian, > >> For some reason we used doubles there and now I simply use UInt8 which >> reduces memory requirements by more than 80%. > For all scaling filters? > Doesnt this break any excisting RB-Code or scaling quality? I did some comparisons an

Re-2: [MBS] Downsize large picture with yielding w/low memory usage?

Christian, > For some reason we used doubles there and now I simply use UInt8 which > reduces memory requirements by more than 80%. For all scaling filters? Doesnt this break any excisting RB-Code or scaling quality? Thomas Original Message Subject: Re: [MBS] Downsize large p