On 8/28/05, Timothy Hunter <cyclists / nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Joe Van Dyk wrote:
> > On 8/26/05, Ara.T.Howard <Ara.T.Howard / noaa.gov> wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Joe Van Dyk wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Hm, I'm starting to think there's something wrong with my magick
> >>>installation.  :(
> >>
> >>i've found that the only way to go with imagemagick is to compile from source.
> >>the redhat fedora and enterprise rpms are totally hosed: for example loseless
> >>jpeg2000 compression isn't - unless you build from source, which takes hours
> >>due to all the bloody dependancies.  in any case i thought i'd let you know
> >>that in case your installation is a redhat package.
> >>
> >>note:  this info above is about 4 months old - it could be fixed...
> >
> >
> > Thanks... this is on a imagemagick installation compiled from scratch
> > last night though.  6.2.4.  So I'm not sure what's going on.
> >
> > If I have a bunch of RGB values from 0-256, do you know a way to
> > create an image for them?  Apparently the MaxRGB on my installation is
> > around 65000 or so.  The image is around 10kx10k pixels, so speed is
> > sorta important.
> >
> >
> 
> If speed is important then the best thing to do is to build a new
> ImageMagick using the --with-quantum-depth=8 option. Using 8-bit depth
> images considerably reduces IM's memory and CPU requirements and it
> makes the channel intensities range from 0-255 instead of 0-65535, more
> in line with your expectations. For 100-million-pixel images I think it
> would be worth the trouble.
> 
> However, if you don't want to re-install IM and you don't mind paying
> for a couple extra bit operations per channel, you can convert 8-bit
> channels to 16-bit channels like this:
> 
> red16 = (red8 << 8) | red8
> 
> Lastly, take a look at the #store_pixels method. This method lets you
> replace pixels in an image a section at a time, where a section can be a
> single row or column of pixels, or for that matter any rectangle. This
> might be a good compromise between pixel_color and constitute.

I'll try the bitshifting approach, thanks.  

Previously, I had builtup a lookup array that looked like (I think):
color_lookup_table = Array.new
256.times { |i| color_lookup_table << Magick::MaxRGB / i }

And then did a lookup on that table for each color.  You think the
bitshifting approach will be faster than an array lookup?