|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Chris Huff <chr### [at] yahoo com> writes:
> In article <qqm### [at] schlatt fmi uni-konstanz de>, Thomas
> Willhalm <tho### [at] willhalm de> wrote:
> > Perhaps you should consider to apply the filter on the fly. I know
> > that you need more than one pixel a time for several of the
> > exististing and proposed filters. Perhaps it is possible to determine
> > which one you need and forget the others.
>
> This would probably be quite difficult...currently, a filter can access
> any position in the data "images". To do this, you would have to do it
> during rendering, and would probably have to place restrictions on the
> possible things the filters can do. Either that, or recalculate the data
> as it is required...which could get extremely slow. Most people have
> enough disk space.
>
> And what is wrong with a temporary file anyway?
My small hard disc ;-)
I wasn't aware that most filters use much more than a few pixels at a time.
In future, I will be more patient and watch the implementations coming
before I doubt their usefulness.
Thomas
--
http://thomas.willhalm.de/ (includes pgp key)
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |