ImageMagick vs GD

oldengine · January 1st, 2005, 07:23 PM

I am having trouble getting full editing results from GD and ImageMagick simply doesn't appear to be working at all, however, it would appear that ImageMagick should have more features and benefits than GD.

EDIT: After an update and recompile of Php, GD 2.0.28 is now working - rotating images and all. Surely, there must be more than twelve people with a comparative opinion about GD and ImageMagick?

Which one are you using? GD or ImageMagick?

Zachery · January 1st, 2005, 07:44 PM

Im

nyifan · January 1st, 2005, 08:18 PM

I wanted to use IM but even though it is installed on my server and should be working, it doesn't seem to do anything at all, so I'm using GD

V-Rodforums · January 1st, 2005, 08:44 PM

I use imagemagick, I have found that one difference between PP and vba gallery is that with PP for imagemagick to work I had to specify the exact address on the server and include the program name. PP example /usr/bin/morgify while with vba gallery I had to drop the morgify for it to work and used simply /usr/bin/ and that worked fine. I still haven't been able to get the water mark working but haven't spent a lot of time on it either.

Reynaldo · January 1st, 2005, 11:47 PM

I never got ImageMagick to work with VBA, it worked with everything else.

About the watermark, I'm using a on-the-fly solution just like photopost.

GrBear · January 2nd, 2005, 03:48 AM

I got the resize aspect of IM to work, but as others have mentioned, the watermark feature doesn't appear to work. I've gone back to GD. After discovering the transparency quirk with GD, I don't see any reason to go back to IM unless there is a tremendous savings in speed. I can do everything with GD including transparent watermarks now, so I guess I'm happy.

Zachery · January 2nd, 2005, 06:49 AM

GD has much more limited support, no gif, no pdf, no psd, ect. IM is a much more functiinoal image manipulation script.

oldengine · January 2nd, 2005, 03:22 PM

I feel like I'm on a treasure hunt getting ImageMagick to work.

I have a script named convert in /usr/bin

# convert -version
Version: ImageMagick 5.5.6 04/01/03 Q16 http://www.imagemagick.org
Copyright: Copyright (C) 2003 ImageMagick Studio LLC

My vbAdvanced path is set to /usr/bin/

Yet thumbnails that are created just fine with GD are a red X with ImageMagick and the none of the edit image tools do anything: Rotate Image: 0 90 180 270 ° Flip Image Horizontally or Flip Image Vertically.

There has to be a key to this mystery somewhere?

04screamer · February 19th, 2005, 01:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldengine

I feel like I'm on a treasure hunt getting ImageMagick to work.

I have a script named convert in /usr/bin

# convert -version
Version: ImageMagick 5.5.6 04/01/03 Q16 http://www.imagemagick.org
Copyright: Copyright (C) 2003 ImageMagick Studio LLC

My vbAdvanced path is set to /usr/bin/

Yet thumbnails that are created just fine with GD are a red X with ImageMagick and the none of the edit image tools do anything: Rotate Image: 0 90 180 270 ° Flip Image Horizontally or Flip Image Vertically.

There has to be a key to this mystery somewhere?

I'm having the same problem. I'd rather use IM, but it doesn't work. I haven't seen this reported as a bug though.

pdatotaal · February 19th, 2005, 05:12 AM

Like to have ImageMagick but the hosting company says it is to server heavy (?), So have only GD.:-(

Zachery · February 19th, 2005, 06:22 AM

ImageMagick is faster and less resource intensive than GD is

mholtum · February 19th, 2005, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nyifan

I wanted to use IM but even though it is installed on my server and should be working, it doesn't seem to do anything at all, so I'm using GD

Yea me too...

pdatotaal · February 20th, 2005, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachery

ImageMagick is faster and less resource intensive than GD is

Are you sure? also on a shared server (more websites on one server).
I must now make a good story for the webhosting company.. So do you have proof?

ConqSoft · February 20th, 2005, 10:54 AM

I switched mine to IM and it does appear to cause less of a slowdown on the site while it's processing images.

oldengine · March 10th, 2005, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachery

GD has much more limited support, no gif, no pdf, no psd, ect. IM is a much more functiinoal image manipulation script.

Care to create and post an ImageMagik "HOW TO" here on this site?

March 10th, 2005, 09:26 AM

There's not really anything to post... All you need should be at imagemagick.org

Zachery · March 10th, 2005, 09:53 AM

Installing ImageMagick requres a shell account at the very very least.

-Chef- · March 10th, 2005, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachery

GD has much more limited support, no gif, no pdf, no psd, ect. IM is a much more functiinoal image manipulation script.

Doesn't GD2+ handle these? I have always used GD2 as it always seemed easier to get working properly. Before GD2, I did use IM due to the previous lack of gif support of GD1.

mholtum · March 10th, 2005, 06:14 PM

I have image Magick installed on my server as it worked for me when I was using both Coppermine & this other gallery yet when I try to use it with the Gallery I got here, it doesn't work..

Go figure..

04screamer · April 3rd, 2005, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 04screamer

I'm having the same problem. I'd rather use IM, but it doesn't work. I haven't seen this reported as a bug though.

...or officially addressed. After the upgrade to RC4, I'm still having the same issue. Any plans to fix this problem?