note 40874 added to function.imagecopyresampled

I was certain that image resampling could be faster, so I ran two test on my PII 400 computer comparing both GD2 (PHP4.3.1) and ImageMagick, a free set of image functions you can find here: http://www.imagemagick.org . Both tests resized a set of 10 photos 3.2MP (2048x1536) in size. On the first test, I created two thumbnails for each photo, one 700 pixels in width and another at 120 pixels in width. On the second test, I created just one thumbnail, 120 pixels in width. Time was counted in "minutes.seconds." TEST#1 -- IMAGEMAGICK* ------------------------------------------------------ METHOD TIME IMAGE QUALITY thumbnail.........1.33 good sample............0.24 bad resize............1.33 good size/geometry.....0.42 good TEST #1 -- GD2 (PHP) ------------------------------------------------------ METHOD TIME IMAGE QUALITY Imagecopyresampled 1.57 good TEST#2 -- IMAGEMAGICK* ------------------------------------------------------ METHOD TIME IMAGE QUALITY thumbnail.........0.26 good sample............0.19 bad resize............1.13 good size/geometry.....0.06 good TEST #2 -- GD2 (PHP) ------------------------------------------------------ METHOD TIME IMAGE QUALITY Imagecopyresampled 0.56 good *ImageMagick Command Methods: thumbnail........convert -thumbnail $targetSize $sourceFile $targetFile sample...........convert -sample $targetSize $sourceFile $targetFile resize...........convert -resize $targetSize $sourceFile $targetFile size/geometry....convert -size $targetSize $sourceFile -geometry $targetSize $targetFile CONCLUSIONS: ------------------------------------------------------ There were four different imagemagick commands I tried out in all. Overall, the winner came out to be the imagemagick size/geometry command. This method beat out PHP by a good margin, creating thumbnails in about 1/3 the time it took PHP with similar quality in the first test, and then being truly quick on the second test by creating thumbnails in about 1/10 the time. Imagemagick seems to increase its performance compared to PHP when creating a smaller thumbnail versus a relatively large thumbnail, as seen by test #2 versus test #1. The fraction of the time it takes for imagemagick to create smaller thumbnails (based on these results) makes ImageMagick almost necessary for dynamically created thumbnail galleries that need to trim resources, or at least until the Imagecopyresampled function is updated. ---- Manual Page -- http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.imagecopyresampled.php Edit -- http://master.php.net/manage/user-notes.php?action=edit+40874 Delete -- http://master.php.net/manage/user-notes.php?action=delete+40874&report=yes Reject -- http://master.php.net/manage/user-notes.php?action=reject+40874&report=yes Search -- http://master.php.net/manage/user-notes.php