hello
inkscape supports imagemagick, which is nowadays usable but had a lot of issues. this is why i switched to graphicsmagick, a faster and more reliable (maintained) port of it. please consider supporting graphicsmagick. except of the names, both expose the same api.
many thanks
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 09:42 +0100, Dennis Heuer wrote:
inkscape supports imagemagick, which is nowadays usable but had a lot of issues. this is why i switched to graphicsmagick, a faster and more reliable (maintained) port of it. please consider supporting graphicsmagick. except of the names, both expose the same api.
My understanding is that this can be chosen at compile time by using configure flags, though I have not attempted it myself.
None the less, if any effort is spent on that code it would probably be to port it to GEGL rather than dealing with *magick.
--Ted
On 11/29/09, Ted Gould wrote:
None the less, if any effort is spent on that code it would probably be to port it to GEGL rather than dealing with *magick.
This could make a good GSoC project, if nobody picks it before next spring. Talking of perfomance, GEGL/babl team has started working on multithreading recently (about two weeks), so using GEGL shouldn't be slowing Inkscape (further) down soon.
Alexandre
participants (3)
-
Alexandre Prokoudine -
Dennis Heuer -
Ted Gould