You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org by "matt.accola" <ma...@empowermx.com> on 2008/09/11 18:14:56 UTC
ImageIO TIFF capabilities / Comparison to JAI Image I/O Tools
We are using Apache FOP 0.95 to produce TIFF images in CCITT T.6 format and
the performance is quite poor. It seems Apache FOP is selecting the JAI
Image I/O library to produce the images. Installing the native libraries
helps with the compression but still we are seeing around 1 second / image
which adds up over time.
The JDK also has an ImageIO library. What is difference between this and
JAI Image I/O tools? Why is Apache FOP not using the ImageIO API? Is there
any way to force Apache FOP to use the ImageIO API?
My thought is, since ImageIO is a standard part of the JDK, using this
instead of JAI Image I/O Tools might allow us to leverage a faster
implementation built by a vendor, such as IBM. We run on IBM WebSphere in
some deployments.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/ImageIO-TIFF-capabilities---Comparison-to-JAI-Image-I-O-Tools-tp19438593p19438593.html
Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: ImageIO TIFF capabilities / Comparison to JAI Image I/O Tools
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
The JAI Image I/O Tools library is actually a set of ImageIO codecs, so
we ARE using ImageIO. A normal Sun JDK doesn't have a TIFF codec behind
the ImageIO API, so this is why JAI Image I/O Tools is necessary. Maybe
IBM has a TIFF codec built in. I don't know.
On 11.09.2008 18:14:56 matt.accola wrote:
>
> We are using Apache FOP 0.95 to produce TIFF images in CCITT T.6 format and
> the performance is quite poor. It seems Apache FOP is selecting the JAI
> Image I/O library to produce the images. Installing the native libraries
> helps with the compression but still we are seeing around 1 second / image
> which adds up over time.
>
> The JDK also has an ImageIO library. What is difference between this and
> JAI Image I/O tools? Why is Apache FOP not using the ImageIO API? Is there
> any way to force Apache FOP to use the ImageIO API?
>
> My thought is, since ImageIO is a standard part of the JDK, using this
> instead of JAI Image I/O Tools might allow us to leverage a faster
> implementation built by a vendor, such as IBM. We run on IBM WebSphere in
> some deployments.
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/ImageIO-TIFF-capabilities---Comparison-to-JAI-Image-I-O-Tools-tp19438593p19438593.html
> Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org