PI

PI

Post by Dea » Sat, 16 Jan 1999 04:00:00



I am having trouble with photoImpact.

When I have a large image (>5MB)  My computer goes nuts.  When
photoImpact draws the image, it goes square by square, and takes about
10 minutes to draw the picture.  Then, say I wanted to reduce the
amount of colors by the Format command.  Well, the computer churns for
longer than I am patient, so I CTL+ALT+DEL it to close PI.  This is
very annoying.  The images I am working on are as follows:

Just got a scanner (Microtek ScanMaker X6)
Scannning in photos, magazine pages, etc for quality comparison.
Usualy 600DPI, Billions of Colors, and about 1900X1300

My computer:

OC'ed P166MMX to 266
Soyo 5EHM mainboard
Matrox Millenium II  video card
64MB ram
700MB free on my windows swap file drive
Directx 6

Is it just that photo editing takes a tremendous amount of CPU power?
I didn't think that it would get this slow on my machine though.

-Dean
--
Dean      

 
 
 

PI

Post by Dea » Sat, 16 Jan 1999 04:00:00


Add two things:

Version 4.2

How do I unselect something once I select it, if the whole image is
slected.  I can't click somewhere off the image on the canvas, because
the selection is the size of the canvas.  I have to unselet it to
rotate it 90 degrees.


>I am having trouble with photoImpact.

>When I have a large image (>5MB)  My computer goes nuts.  When
>photoImpact draws the image, it goes square by square, and takes about
>10 minutes to draw the picture.  Then, say I wanted to reduce the
>amount of colors by the Format command.  Well, the computer churns for
>longer than I am patient, so I CTL+ALT+DEL it to close PI.  This is
>very annoying.  The images I am working on are as follows:

>Just got a scanner (Microtek ScanMaker X6)
>Scannning in photos, magazine pages, etc for quality comparison.
>Usualy 600DPI, Billions of Colors, and about 1900X1300

>My computer:

>OC'ed P166MMX to 266
>Soyo 5EHM mainboard
>Matrox Millenium II  video card
>64MB ram
>700MB free on my windows swap file drive
>Directx 6

>Is it just that photo editing takes a tremendous amount of CPU power?
>I didn't think that it would get this slow on my machine though.

>-Dean
>--
>Dean      


--
Dean      


 
 
 

PI

Post by Don Galbrait » Sat, 16 Jan 1999 04:00:00



> I am having trouble with photoImpact.

> When I have a large image (>5MB)  My computer goes nuts.  When
> photoImpact draws the image, it goes square by square, and takes about
> 10 minutes to draw the picture.  Then, say I wanted to reduce the
> amount of colors by the Format command.  Well, the computer churns for
> longer than I am patient, so I CTL+ALT+DEL it to close PI.  This is
> very annoying.  The images I am working on are as follows:

> Just got a scanner (Microtek ScanMaker X6)
> Scannning in photos, magazine pages, etc for quality comparison.
> Usualy 600DPI, Billions of Colors, and about 1900X1300

> My computer:

> OC'ed P166MMX to 266
> Soyo 5EHM mainboard
> Matrox Millenium II  video card
> 64MB ram
> 700MB free on my windows swap file drive
> Directx 6

> Is it just that photo editing takes a tremendous amount of CPU power?
> I didn't think that it would get this slow on my machine though.

> -Dean
> --
> Dean


Remember that doing ANYTHING to an image requires at least two copies in
memory. Your images are about 7.5 MB (if they're 24-bit color), so
that's at least 15 MB. If you allow just a few levels of "undo" you'll
have many, many more megabytes tied up (and, of course, if there's
anything else in memory - and there always is, in Windows...). I
experienced a GREAT improvment in performance going from 32 MB to 96 MB,
and my current 128 MB is even better.
 
 
 

PI

Post by Jason Dun » Sat, 16 Jan 1999 04:00:00


Quote:>How do I unselect something once I select it, if the whole image is
>slected

Hit the space bar.

****************************************************************************
**

Microsoft MVP - Windows CE
Kensai Design & Communications - http://www.kensai.com
****************************************************************************
**
http://www.kensai.com/personal
Cyrano page, Chantal Kreviazuk, Martin Luther King, more!

 
 
 

PI

Post by Jason Dun » Sat, 16 Jan 1999 04:00:00


Quote:>Amateurs would just scan the picture 100 dpi not 600 dpi.

Actually, the amateur would scan it in an 9600 dpi and then wonder why it's
so slow.  :-)

****************************************************************************
**

Microsoft MVP - Windows CE
Kensai Design & Communications - http://www.kensai.com
****************************************************************************
**
http://www.kensai.com/personal
Cyrano page, Chantal Kreviazuk, Martin Luther King, more!

 
 
 

PI

Post by Tony Celes » Sat, 16 Jan 1999 04:00:00



>Scannning in photos, magazine pages, etc for quality comparison.
>Usualy 600DPI, Billions of Colors, and about 1900X1300

Ack !!! 600 DPI ? THAT'S a problem !

An 8" x 11" image scanned at 300 dpi takes up about 25 MB of memory.
An 8" x 11" image scanned at 600 dpi takes up about 100 MB of memory..

That's *just* the image. There's other memory being gobbled up by
Windows itself (often about 32 MB for Win 95) plus the memory being
used by your scanner, your image editor, and whatever other programs
you have open (like browsers) or running in the background (like virus
scanners).

Try scanning print at 300 dpi.  You may even be able to scan other
images (such as photos) at 100 to 200 dpi.

Tony

 
 
 

PI

Post by Opus (:> » Sat, 16 Jan 1999 04:00:00


Hitting your space bar will deselect an image without using your mouse.

--

Opus (:>
http://www.veryComputer.com/~fizzy/dlan.html
http://www.veryComputer.com/~fizzy/*room.html

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity."

 
 
 

PI

Post by ±è?üá? ; Kim, Hyungji » Sun, 17 Jan 1999 04:00:00


Of course image editing takes a lot of CPU power. Amateurs would just scan
the picture 100 dpi not 600 dpi. That takes 36 times more space and power of
the computer. If you have image 1900x1300 that means you have more than 2
million pixels. In order to PhotoImpact calculate the new value for a pixel,
it would take hundreds of calculations. For 1900x1300 pixels picture it
would need almost a billion times of calculations.
Thus, not if you are a professional, use 100 dpi. If you are one then use
300 dpi (you should have the best system in the market).

In order to unselect, right-click on it, then select "None". If "None" is
not active, try to select "Merge". If you move the image after selecting
some parts, then moved image becomes an object. Thus you need to "Merge" in
order to take it back to normal picture. "None" does not work in some
occasions, then change the mode from "New" to "Subtract", then make a box
selection, then it would be taken out of the selected areas. Then change the
mode back to "New", then click on the area you just subtracted.


>Add two things:

>Version 4.2

>How do I unselect something once I select it, if the whole image is
>slected.  I can't click somewhere off the image on the canvas, because
>the selection is the size of the canvas.  I have to unselet it to
>rotate it 90 degrees.

 
 
 

PI

Post by daarksu » Sun, 24 Jan 1999 04:00:00


Depending on what you are scanning for,  99% of the time you never need
to scan anything over 150 dpi. Anymore than that and you are just wasting
space. A 5 to 10 mb scan can take awhile to download. Internet stuff is
scanned at 72 dpi.

daarksun
http://home.earthlink.net/~daarksun
http://members.xoom.com/daarksun


> I am having trouble with photoImpact.

> When I have a large image (>5MB)  My computer goes nuts.  When
> photoImpact draws the image, it goes square by square, and takes about
> 10 minutes to draw the picture.  Then, say I wanted to reduce the
> amount of colors by the Format command.  Well, the computer churns for
> longer than I am patient, so I CTL+ALT+DEL it to close PI.  This is
> very annoying.  The images I am working on are as follows:

> Just got a scanner (Microtek ScanMaker X6)
> Scannning in photos, magazine pages, etc for quality comparison.
> Usualy 600DPI, Billions of Colors, and about 1900X1300

> My computer:

> OC'ed P166MMX to 266
> Soyo 5EHM mainboard
> Matrox Millenium II  video card
> 64MB ram
> 700MB free on my windows swap file drive
> Directx 6

> Is it just that photo editing takes a tremendous amount of CPU power?
> I didn't think that it would get this slow on my machine though.

> -Dean
> --
> Dean


 
 
 

PI

Post by M & » Sun, 24 Jan 1999 04:00:00



>I am having trouble with photoImpact.
>When I have a large image (>5MB)  My computer goes nuts.  When
>photoImpact draws the image, it goes square by square, and takes about
>10 minutes to draw the picture.  Then, say I wanted to reduce the
>amount of colors by the Format command.  Well, the computer churns for
>longer than I am patient, so I CTL+ALT+DEL it to close PI.
>Just got a scanner (Microtek ScanMaker X6)
>Scannning in photos, magazine pages, etc for quality comparison.
>Usualy 600DPI, Billions of Colors, and about 1900X1300

One thing I've not seen addressed is your mention of scanning in
*billions* of colors (36 bit?). I too have the X6 and had not found a
program which would even accept such output. I hadn't tried it with PI,
though. Drop that setting to *millions* of colors and I bet you won't
have such problems and will notice absolutely no difference in the
image, no matter the intended end use.
Also, I know there are many opinions on optimal scanning resolution, but
with my printer (Epson SC 600) I found by extensive trial & error that
roughly 1/4 the intended printer resolution yielded the best output.
With certain images, going up to 1/3 the intended DPI was better, but
only rarely. So, for my printer's highest setting, 1440 DPI, 360 to
about 400 scanning DPI of photos yields the best printed image. This is
higher than general opinion would suggest, but I've done the tiresome
experiments and found clear improvement up to this point. Only
experimentation will reveal YOUR optimal settings. (Perhaps printer
differences account partially for the varying opinions, eh?). Anyhow,
unless you are scanning for photo quality printing AND scaling up your
image, there is no real reason to be using 600 DPI.

          Mike

 
 
 

PI

Post by Dea » Tue, 26 Jan 1999 04:00:00


That is PI that accepts it.  I havn't found any other programs that
will accept that amout of colors though.

It says on the box that I got it that the X6 supports 600x1200 dpi
scanning.  I don't know how to specify both the x and y dpi.  I can
only specify in one box one dimemsion.

Now I need a color printer.  I have a HP laserjet 3, but that doesn't
do graphics very good.  Text is great though ;-)

-Dean


Quote:>One thing I've not seen addressed is your mention of scanning in
>*billions* of colors (36 bit?). I too have the X6 and had not found a
>program which would even accept such output. I hadn't tried it with PI,
>though. Drop that setting to *millions* of colors and I bet you won't
>have such problems and will notice absolutely no difference in the
>image, no matter the intended end use.
>Also, I know there are many opinions on optimal scanning resolution, but
>with my printer (Epson SC 600) I found by extensive trial & error that
>roughly 1/4 the intended printer resolution yielded the best output.
>With certain images, going up to 1/3 the intended DPI was better, but
>only rarely. So, for my printer's highest setting, 1440 DPI, 360 to
>about 400 scanning DPI of photos yields the best printed image. This is
>higher than general opinion would suggest, but I've done the tiresome
>experiments and found clear improvement up to this point. Only
>experimentation will reveal YOUR optimal settings. (Perhaps printer
>differences account partially for the varying opinions, eh?). Anyhow,
>unless you are scanning for photo quality printing AND scaling up your
>image, there is no real reason to be using 600 DPI.

>          Mike

--
Dean      

 
 
 

PI

Post by M & » Tue, 26 Jan 1999 04:00:00



>That is PI that accepts it.

And you discovered what happens when you give it an image in *billions*
of colors. Incidentally, I found an error in my original reply. That
billions relates to the X6's 30 bits, not 36.

Quote:>It says on the box that I got it that the X6 supports 600x1200 dpi
>scanning.  I don't know how to specify both the x and y dpi.  I can
>only specify in one box one dimemsion.

That's it.

        Mike


>>One thing I've not seen addressed is your mention of scanning in
>>*billions* of colors (36 bit?). I too have the X6 and had not found a
>>program which would even accept such output. I hadn't tried it with
PI,
>>though. Drop that setting to *millions* of colors and I bet you won't
>>have such problems and will notice absolutely no difference in the
>>image, no matter the intended end use.