Hans Nyberg wrote:
> --- In #email-removed# Pablo dAngelo <pablo.dangelo@...> wrote:
>> Actually, this needs to be done once a end-user useable version of enblend
>> 3.1 is available.
> The 3.1 works exactly like Enblend has done since I started to use it in 2004,
> Why should that be a problem for testing the performance.
> I tried to point out that at least the Mac version of 3.0 and 3.1 had a memory problem which
> cancelled blending at more than 3000 mb applied but I got no reply about that.
I haven't had problems with large panoramas (>300 Megapixel, 16 bit) on my
machine (64 bit, Linux).
I guess the OSX binaries are 32 bit ones (at least the Intel part).
32 bit programs cannot access more than 2-3 GB of RAM (I don't know the
actual limitation of OSX, but according to your tests it seems to be around
One needs a 64 bit operating system and applications compiled for 64 bit, in
order to use more than the 3 GB of RAM. I guess this is possible for the
enblend 3.1 release.
> If there are any news in 3.1 which needs testing I need a dokumentation about it.
Except for support of other file formats as tiff and the ability to blend
HDR images (although there are still some problems with very high contrast
parts), not a lot has changed in enblend.
P.S. Your comments on how open source sucks do not exactly motivate open
source developers such as me to answer your questions.