![]() Hidden layers are not taken into account when recalculating the projection, but they are still loaded, so still count towards the memory needs of the image. No, if you're only working on part of the image, unless you have something in your layer stack that needs the entire image, like some filter layers, or a layer style, only the bits that you touch will be updated. Then we need to render the projection to something that can be shown on screen: depending on whether you have canvas acceleration enabled, that means that we need width * height * 4 bytes of GPU memory or CPU memory to store the screen image. Both programs also allow you to use older versions of the software and keep them available for download online. psd files to transfer work between Krita and GIMP to finish projects. In order to render larger image, we use mip-mapping: we have multiple versions of every layer and the projection, at 100%, 50%, 25% etc. This compatibility is helpful when working between these programs and Adobe. This projection is as big as your image in pixels, and has the same channel depth and color model. The layers are rendered on something called a "projection". Then you need to consider how an image is rendered: you have the actual layer data. They need to be uncompressed when loading into memory, and depending on the image contents, compression might make an image very small: a regular raster of black and white pixels, for instance compresses really well. You can have a 600 dpi image with a width of one inch by one inch, which would translate to 600 pixels by 600 pixels. First, you need to stop thinking in terms of dpi. I have created 600dpi file which size is 126MB, opening krita it states that the image size is 4.4 GB (it is strange that RAM that is needed is so huge and does not correlate in actual size). Tomwh wrote:I have a questions to boudewijn. Sorry if stupid questions or not suitable in here. (Also a bit strange that when i use "save as" the original file name stays visible in saved document just strange - my first idea was that would there be any connection between those files and that is why the memory is so huge)? What if I do not want to use all the layers in the file in my finale image example When I am working in specific area so all of the pixels are visible then do i really need to have all the layers information also the once that are hidden? That means that everything has to be loaded from the swap into memory, from memory into the cache, and then swapped out again. But if you zoom so all of the pixels are visible, and try to paint a big diagonal stripe over the image on, say, the second layer from the bottom, then Krita will have to access nearly all of the contents of all the layers to create the final rendered image.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |