On 02/19/2010 06:20 PM, Eugene Zagidullin wrote:
> Is it possible to create full-image ops? A good example of such an op is exposure
> fusion technique by Mertens& Kautz. It's output depends of full-image Laplacian
> pyramid decomposition.
Processing in an operation is done on-demand. The operation is asked to
"for these inputs, give me output for the rectangle R". So it doesn't
make sense to write an op that ignores the ROI, how would it know what
data to give?
Note that you can ask GEGL to process a whole node, which in effect will
process "the entire image". For example, you could have this graph:
inputimage1 inputimage2 inputimage3
| | |
+--------------+ | +-----------+
| | |
exposure-fusion
|
png-save
Then, if you process the entire png-save node, this will happen:
GEGL will try to calculate the bounding box for png-save. This depends
on the bounding-box of exposure-fusion, so GEGL will ask exposure fusion
about the bounding box. The exposure-fusion node bounding box depends on
the bounding box of the input images, so GEGL will ask about the
bounding box of the images. This is a recursive process of course.
Once the bounding-box of the dependencies have been determined, the ROI
will be set to exactly the ROI needed to process the full image.
HTH,
/ Martin
--
My GIMP Blog:
http://www.chromecode.com/
"Multi-column dock windows and 2.8 schedule"
_______________________________________________
Gegl-developer mailing list
Gegl-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
