Hi, I definitely agree that it shouldn't replace the current library (especially considering the performance, didn't think it would be that slow). I think the nicest way would be a checkbox or a dropdown in the jpeg export section.
Nils Von: Heiko Bauke Gesendet: Freitag, 17. März 2017 19:43 An: darktable-dev@lists.darktable.org Betreff: Re: [darktable-dev] Proposing better jpeg encoder by Google Hi, Am 17.03.2017 um 16:36 schrieb Holger Klemm: > I have read, the encoder is very slow... I just compiled the guetzli tool, took some random image (jpeg file of 3000x2000 pixel) and recompressed this image, which took 5 minutes and 32 sec. on my laptop (Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4500U CPU @ 1.80GHz) utilizing more than a Gbyte of main memory. The original file was 1.8 Mbytes large, after recompression this reduced to about 1.2 Mbytes. The new google tool is an option to go only if file size is a major issue but not cpu time while compressing. This is not a general purpose jpeg library and therefore it should not replace the jpeg library that is currently employed in darktable. Heiko -- -- Number Crunch Blog @ https://www.numbercrunch.de -- Cluster Computing @ http://www.clustercomputing.de -- Professional @ https://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/personalhomes/bauke -- Social Networking @ https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Heiko_Bauke ___________________________________________________________________________ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org ___________________________________________________________________________ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
