Hi All,

Although I'm just a newbie, your question intrigued me.

Looking at the image you referred to, Firefox tells me that it is 7,360px × 4,912px (scaled to 864px × 577px). If what I have been told is correct, that 1 pixel = 1 byte ( or thereabouts), that is a 36mb file, which to my mind is enormous.

Are my sums right?

If so, what do others think?

HTH,

Derek Mortimer

----- Original Message ----- From: "Partha Bagchi"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 1:46 AM Subject: [Gimp-user] Benchmarking Gimp/GEGL

Hi All,

Want to gauge your experience.

Test Machine: HP Pavilion dv8 Notebook PC (19" display Nvidia 1G dedicated video RAM), intel Core i7 Q720 @1.60GHz, 8GB RAM, Windows 7, 64-bit

Steps I took:

Start timer: 0.00.0 (mins.secs.micorsecs) Open location ->
http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/img/sample01/img_01_l.jpg Rendered - Timer: 1.38.0
Duplicate Layer
Checked off "Use GEGL" in Colors Menu Tool -> GEGL Operation ->c2g (Used defaults) Rendered: Timer: 6:00
Color -> Invert -> Convert layer Mode -> Dodge Rendered Timer: 7:53.0
Menu -> Filter -> Gaussian Blur (20 Percent) (not px but pc) Rendered Timer; 21:30 Sec.
Add Layer mask. (default - white)
Use Blend on mask (black linear)
Render Timer: 23.37.6

So, total time 23 minutes, 37 seconds.

So, what kind of timing do you get with your OS?

Looks like the Nikon D800 is going to really going to put us through the wringer. :)

Thanks,
Partha
_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

* Derek Mortimer [03-20-12 07:55]:

Although I'm just a newbie, your question intrigued me.

Looking at the image you referred to, Firefox tells me that it is 7,360px 4,912px (scaled to 864px 577px). If what I have been told is correct, that 1 pixel = 1 byte ( or thereabouts), that is a 36mb file, which to my mind is enormous.

Are my sums right?

If so, what do others think?

He is probably processing a file from one of the new Nikons, D4/D800.

(paka)Patrick Shanahan       Plainfield, Indiana, USA      HOG # US1244711
http://wahoo.no-ip.org        Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
http://en.opensuse.org                           openSUSE Community Member
Registered Linux User #207535                    @ http://linuxcounter.net
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

On 12-03-19 09:46 PM, Partha Bagchi wrote:

Test Machine: HP Pavilion dv8 Notebook PC (19" display Nvidia 1G dedicated video RAM), intel Core i7 Q720 @1.60GHz, 8GB RAM, Windows 7, 64-bit

[snip]

So, what kind of timing do you get with your OS?

While some will find the information interesting, the timing others will experience depends very little on the operating system being used. The results will vary greatly based on the type of CPU and its clock speed, and the type and speed of memory, and number of wait states. The type of video card might also affect the results.

* Kevin Cozens [03-20-12 11:41]:

On 12-03-19 09:46 PM, Partha Bagchi wrote:

Test Machine: HP Pavilion dv8 Notebook PC (19" display Nvidia 1G dedicated video RAM), intel Core i7 Q720 @1.60GHz, 8GB RAM, Windows 7, 64-bit

[snip]

So, what kind of timing do you get with your OS?

While some will find the information interesting, the timing others will experience depends very little on the operating system being used. The results will vary greatly based on the type of CPU and its clock speed, and the type and speed of memory, and number of wait states. The type of video card might also affect the results.

and the user's speed in entering the commands.

Hi everybody,

I'm new on this list. It would be a great thing to measure the performance with and without GEGL, so with an older version of GIMP, and with the new one. But I don't really know what things have been changed, so I'm not sure it would give a proper answer.

Semmu

2012. március 20. 17:02 Patrick Shanahan írta, :

* Kevin Cozens [03-20-12 11:41]:

On 12-03-19 09:46 PM, Partha Bagchi wrote:

Test Machine: HP Pavilion dv8 Notebook PC (19" display Nvidia 1G dedicated video RAM), intel Core i7 Q720 @1.60GHz, 8GB RAM, Windows 7, 64-bit

[snip]

So, what kind of timing do you get with your OS?

While some will find the information interesting, the timing others will experience depends very little on the operating system being used. The results will vary greatly based on the type of CPU and its clock speed,

and

the type and speed of memory, and number of wait states. The type of

video

card might also affect the results.

and the user's speed in entering the commands.

-- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Lszl Boros wrote:

Hi everybody,

I'm new on this list. It would be a great thing to measure the performance with and without GEGL, so with an older version of GIMP, and with the new one. But I don't really know what things have been changed, so I'm not sure it would give a proper answer.

Measuring the performance of GIMP with and without GEGL does not really make sense yet, due to additional overheads of different kinds that are involved (many of which eventually will disappear when the transformation of GIMP is complete). One of these is the ping-pong dance going back and forth between 128 bits/pixel and 32bits/pixel for every thing that is done.

/

The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed
                        -- William Gibson
http://pippin.gimp.org/
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 11:44 +0000, Derek Mortimer wrote:

Looking at the image you referred to, Firefox tells me that it is 7,360px 4,912px (scaled to 864px 577px). If what I have been told is correct, that 1 pixel = 1 byte ( or thereabouts), that is a 36mb file, which to my mind is enormous.

That's correct for an 8-bit GIF image but not much else. For JPEG at 8-bit per channel it's 24 bits, i.e. 3 bytes, per pixel. For PNG with alpha channel, 4 bytes per channel, but a camera raw file is likely to use 16 bits per channel per pixel in RGB (even though not bits are used for most cameras) giving 6 bytes per pixel, and about 215 MBytes of data.

The compressed JPEG file should be quite a bit smaller, of course.

I routinely deal with images that are over a gigabyte.

Liam

Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org

_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

On 12-03-20 06:26 PM, Partha Bagchi wrote:

I clearly stated all the information in the post. I did ask what your performance. Why don't you post that?

Were you asking me why I didn't post any performance data? If so, it is because I see little to no value in the results you would get and I have other things to do than wait a half hour or more for the test to run (if I have enough memory available to run the test).

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Partha Bagchi wrote:

So, what kind of timing do you get with your OS?

While some will find the information interesting, the timing others will experience depends very little on the operating system being used. The results will vary greatly based on the type of CPU and its clock speed, and the type and speed of memory, and number of wait states. The type of video card might also affect the results.

and the user's speed in entering the commands.

It also turns out that babl and GEGL on win32 seem to be compiled practically without optimization and without taking modern instruction sets into account, making any testing of them on windows unrepresentative of their actual performance.

/

The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed
                        -- William Gibson
http://pippin.gimp.org/              http://ffii.org/
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list