On Wed, 2012-11-28, Christian Heimes wrote: > Am 28.11.2012 19:14, schrieb Michael Torrie: >> I'm curious. What features do you need that pil doesn't have? Other >> than updating pil to fix bugs, support new image types or new versions >> of Python, what kind of active development do you think it needs to >> have? Maybe pil has all the features the original author wanted and is >> pretty stable. To judge a package on how fast it's changing seems a bit >> odd to me.
Not to me -- the slower the change, the better! >> Obviously you want to know that bugs can get fixed of >> course. Perhaps none have been reported recently. > > PIL is missing a bunch of features like proper TIFF support (no > multipage, g3/g4 compression and more), JPEG 2000, I thought those formats were dead since about a decade? (Ok, I know TIFF has niches, but JPEG 2000?) > RAW and HDR image > formats, tone mapping, proper ICC support, PEP 3128 buffer support ... I won't comment on those, but they seem likely to be valid complaints. > PIL is also rather slow. My smc.freeimage library can write JPEGs about > six times faster, because it uses libjpeg-turbo. Only some Linux > distributions have replaced libjpeg with the turbo implementation. That seems like an argument for *not* having support for many file formats in the imaging library itself -- just pipeline into the best standalone utilities available. /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o . -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
