• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: CIImage slower than NSImage?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CIImage slower than NSImage?


  • Subject: Re: CIImage slower than NSImage?
  • From: Milton Sagen <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:14:14 -0800

I was creating the filter just once so that won't help (unless of course you were getting even worse results than me). I think the answer is the GPU compatibility. One more excuse for getting a quad G5. Now if I could just convince my pocketbook.

Milt

On Nov 22, 2005, at 11:00, Kenny Leung wrote:

That's a good suggestion. I'll try it.

Thanks!

-Kenny


On Nov 22, 2005, at 10:46 AM, Jonathan Wight wrote:

Also, are you creating your filter each time you manipulate your image?

I've found that creating filters can be rather expensive and something you should do as little as possible. It is best to create your filters once and just set their attributes when needed.

	Jon.

On Nov 22, 2005, at 13:37, John Stiles wrote:

Is it possible that you're running your CoreImage tests on a Mac which doesn't have a CoreImage-compatible GPU?
The "compatibility" path for CoreImage uses the software OpenGL renderer; in honesty, it's kind of amazing that it works as fast as it does, but it's not going to be as fast as a custom hand- rolled routine that does scaling/rotation.



On Nov 22, 2005, at 9:54 AM, Kenny Leung wrote:

Also, the 128-bit floating point version of an image performs better than the 32-bit integer version!

-Kenny


On Nov 22, 2005, at 9:27 AM, Milton Sagen wrote:

I can't shed any light on it, but I found this to be true of scaling also, by about a factor of three. However, that was on the original PB 17". I haven't tried it on a newer machine with a newer graphics card. Maybe that's where the problem lies. Then again maybe CoreImage is at this point in time simply slower for these relatively simple operations and its power lies elsewhere.

Milt

On Nov 22, 2005, at 09:00, Kenny Leung wrote:

Hi All.

I am using CoreImage in my application, and I'm finding that geometric operations, particularly rotation, are much slower with CIImage than NSImage. In fact, rotating an NSImage causes no noticeable slowdown while rotating a CIImage causes a very noticeable slowdown.

Also, applying a transform to a CIImage as a filter yields different results than when the transform is applied to the current graphics context.

Can someone shed some light on this?

Thanks!

-Kenny


_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden

_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
References: 
 >CIImage slower than NSImage? (From: Kenny Leung <email@hidden>)
 >Re: CIImage slower than NSImage? (From: Milton Sagen <email@hidden>)
 >Re: CIImage slower than NSImage? (From: Kenny Leung <email@hidden>)
 >Re: CIImage slower than NSImage? (From: John Stiles <email@hidden>)
 >Re: CIImage slower than NSImage? (From: Jonathan Wight <email@hidden>)
 >Re: CIImage slower than NSImage? (From: Kenny Leung <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: CIImage slower than NSImage?
  • Next by Date: Re: CIImage slower than NSImage?
  • Previous by thread: Re: CIImage slower than NSImage?
  • Next by thread: Re: CIImage slower than NSImage?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread