You could try running the NT Performance Monitor on the Image Magick process to see what the deal is.
I take it the image manipulation is different every time, so you can't cache the resulting scaled/manipulated image?
What kind of transformations are you doing? It's probably possible to "stream" the JPEG decoding and processing through a pipeline in one pass, as opposed to reading the whole thing and consuming 12 meg of ram, then performing different passes for each part of the process, then encoding the result.
By having more specialized code, or something that architected differently then Image Magick, you can keep more in the CPU's faster memory cache and work on the number crunching while waiting on disk IO at the same time.
Depending on the nature of the transforms, you might reample down and almost certainly crop first, to reduce the work of the image processing.
—John
In reply to Re: ImageMagick too slow
by John M. Dlugosz
in thread ImageMagick too slow
by lpoht
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |