Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It's not dual core, unfortunately. It's 1.6GHz processor, Nvidia 6200 and 1GB memory. Certainly not a fast computer, no doubt.

However, GIMP somehow performs smudge with more detail and more options quite effortlessly which is strange for it being ported to win32 on GTK. You would think that GIMP would be slower for this.

Paint.NET being native win32, I would assume it would make use of DirectX for these things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is certainly neat to try, but the performance is ridiculous. You have to sit and wait each time you click for it to show up. GIMP seems to do this effortlessly and instantaneously.

Is there any way to make future versions perform more appropriately?

I'm installing GIMP right now for testing, but in my experience the render quality is not as good in GIMP, and Photoshop is ridiculously slow. Also, make sure your brush size settings are comparable. Keep in mind the difference between diameter and radius.

LATER: Yep, I just tested in GIMP. You can clearly see banding in the smudge once you start using brush sizes above like 8.

It's not dual core, unfortunately. It's 1.6GHz processor.

Is it a Pentium 4? My Smudge algorithm is especially slow on P4s compared to AMD or other single-core processors with similar performance. The next version will reduce this p4-penalty, but it will still be like swimming in molasses when compared to any multi-core processor.

However, GIMP somehow performs smudge with more detail and more options quite effortlessly which is strange for it being ported to win32 on GTK. You would think that GIMP would be slower for this.
GTK is an interface toolkit - it's responsible for handling the differences between buttons and windows on Linux versus buttons and windows on Windows. It has nothing to do with the data-processing, which will be compiled to native code on each platform it is compiled on.
Paint.NET being native win32, I would assume it would make use of DirectX for these things.

Paint.NET is not native - it's .NET. It runs in a virtual machine.

DirectX has nothing to do with graphics processing in the sense of image editors. Its job is to interface with the graphics card as fast as possible so that the card may do what it's designed for - rendering 2D and 3D images to the screen as fast as possible, with it being perfectly acceptable to sacrifice accuracy for speed. 2D-Graphics editing programs such as Photoshop, GIMP, and Paint.NET are designed for something completely different and use the CPU, not the GPU for all of their work. Although it would be technically possible to use DirectX for it, it would be extremely painful for the programmer, and probably quite a bit slower. This would be akin to using a hammer to drive screws.

I highly recommend upgrading to a dual-or-more-core processor. Not only will Smudge and most other graphics-editing tasks be orders of magnitude faster, but anything else you do on your computer will be faster too. You'll be able to run more programs at once without any of them slowing down.

xZYt6wl.png

ambigram signature by Kemaru

[i write plugins and stuff]

If you like a post, upvote it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

pyrochild,

Thank you so much for taking your time to write all of that and going into detail about each thing. I really do appreciate that. My first post in this topic probably even seemed a little on the negative side with very little substance to it, and yet you took your time to answer me professionally and respectfully. And that, I most definitely appreciate. Thank you.

Anyways, the processor is just a 1.6GHz Celeron, not even dual core. I built this PC a few years back, trying to go as cheap as possible. Although it's got a really decent, fast motherboard that can support a quad core, somehow I decided to slap a Celeron into it. What was I thinking. I'm going to look into picking up a dual core soon because they are incredibly affordable now and would probably show a significant performance increase with my whole disk encryption as well.

You proved me wrong on all of my points and taught me a few things as well. What do I know, I'm just a computer security guy that wishes he could be a graphic designed. But unfortunately, I haven't much creativity for design thus far.

Thank you for being the good person that you are and thanks for creating great plugins and for sharing them with others, of course.

Cheers,

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites
You proved me wrong on all of my points and taught me a few things as well. What do I know, I'm just a computer security guy that wishes he could be a graphic designed. But unfortunately, I haven't much creativity for design thus far.
Everyone has their area of expertise, but it's cool that you're getting into graphics design :D
Thank you for being the good person that you are and thanks for creating great plugins and for sharing them with others, of course.
I just like programming. Haha.

To be honest, your complaints of the performance versus GIMP's smudge tool gave me an idea for the next version of mine. I now want to include a quality setting so that people with slower computers will be able to sacrifice some of the render quality in order to maintain a responsive interaction with the program, if they so choose.

xZYt6wl.png

ambigram signature by Kemaru

[i write plugins and stuff]

If you like a post, upvote it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Paint.NET is not native - it's .NET. It runs in a virtual machine.

Actually, .NET doesn't use a virtual machine. Go here, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx , and search for things like JIT and NGEN.

Since Paint.NET use NGEN at install-time ("Optimizing performance..."), it doesn't have to do any of the JIT compilation and so the whole thing is mapped straight into memory and executed exactly like a native program. (Well "exactly like" is a bit of a simplification...)

DirectX has nothing to do with graphics processing in the sense of image editors.

Tell that to the Photoshop CS4 guys :)

The Paint.NET Blog: https://blog.getpaint.net/

Donations are always appreciated! https://www.getpaint.net/donate.html

forumSig_bmwE60.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. PDN4 will not be GPU-accelerated.

????

For CS4, Adobe rewrote their entire rendering pipeline to be GPU accelerated (afaik/iirc). Go check out their website and demos, etc.

The Paint.NET Blog: https://blog.getpaint.net/

Donations are always appreciated! https://www.getpaint.net/donate.html

forumSig_bmwE60.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

GPU accelerated effects are quite fast. Try this one out, it uses one of the built-in effects in WPF. With my GeForce GTX 260 Core 216, it's very fluid while dragging the slider around. The Gaussian Blur in Paint.NET, which obviously uses the CPU, is nowhere near as fast.

.NET Framework 3.5 SP1 is required.

WpfBlur.zip

The Paint.NET Blog: https://blog.getpaint.net/

Donations are always appreciated! https://www.getpaint.net/donate.html

forumSig_bmwE60.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
GPU accelerated effects are quite fast. Try this one out, it uses one of the built-in effects in WPF. With my GeForce GTX 260 Core 216, it's very fluid while dragging the slider around. The Gaussian Blur in Paint.NET, which obviously uses the CPU, is nowhere near as fast.

.NET Framework 3.5 SP1 is required.

Oi! That's amazing the speed of the rendering is awesome. Why can't Paint.NET benefit from such advancement? It would improve rendering time to warp speed :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oi! That's amazing the speed of the rendering is awesome. Why can't Paint.NET benefit from such advancement? It would improve rendering time to warp speed :P

"Can't" is such a strong word. No, the issue is just that Paint.NET's rendering engine needs to be rewritten to support this, as it was essentially written for a different era of hardware. The upcoming v3.5 contains the first step toward this.

The Paint.NET Blog: https://blog.getpaint.net/

Donations are always appreciated! https://www.getpaint.net/donate.html

forumSig_bmwE60.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
"Can't" is such a strong word. No, the issue is just that Paint.NET's rendering engine needs to be rewritten to support this, as it was essentially written for a different era of hardware. The upcoming v3.5 contains the first step toward this.

Hurray :D! I knew the engine was being rewritten didn't know it was that. Have a :mtdew: or two :mtdew::P

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...