# What's the most common library for Ruby image processing? **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [May 15, 2007, 8:08pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/whats-the-most-common-library-for-ruby-image-processing/104236 "2007-05-15T20:08:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/5fc32e/32.png) [@anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/anakintang)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2007, 8:08pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/whats-the-most-common-library-for-ruby-image-processing/104236/1 "2007-05-15T20:08:58Z")
All, what’s the most common library for Ruby image processing? What I want to do is just compare two images based on pixels. Thanks ---
**Author:** ![anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/5fc32e/32.png) [@anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/anakintang)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2007, 9:03pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/whats-the-most-common-library-for-ruby-image-processing/104236/2 "2007-05-15T21:03:39Z")
On 5/15/07, Yingqi T. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > All, > > what’s the most common library for Ruby image processing? What I want to > do is just compare two images based on pixels. > > Thanks The most common seems to be RMagick, which is itself a binding for the ImageMagick library. ---
**Author:** ![anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/5fc32e/32.png) [@anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/anakintang)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2007, 9:39pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/whats-the-most-common-library-for-ruby-image-processing/104236/3 "2007-05-15T21:39:43Z")
> > what’s the most common library for Ruby image processing? What I want to > > do is just compare two images based on pixels. > > The most common seems to be RMagick, which is itself a binding for the > ImageMagick library. There’s also ImageScience, which is obviously set up as an alternative. Both have their proponents, I think. – Giles B. I’m running a time management experiment: I’m only checking e-mail twice per day, at 11am and 5pm. If you need to get in touch quicker than that, call me on my cell. Blog: [http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com](http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com) Portfolio: [http://www.gilesgoatboy.org](http://www.gilesgoatboy.org) ---
**Author:** ![anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/5fc32e/32.png) [@anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/anakintang)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2007, 11:34am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/whats-the-most-common-library-for-ruby-image-processing/104236/4 "2007-05-16T11:34:45Z")
On 5/15/07, Giles B. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > > what’s the most common library for Ruby image processing? What I want to > > > do is just compare two images based on pixels. > > > > The most common seems to be RMagick, which is itself a binding for the > > ImageMagick library. > > There’s also ImageScience, which is obviously set up as an > alternative. Both have their proponents, I think. Had a look at the homepage, but it seems it’s just a smallish thumbnail generator - which is fine, if that’s the only thing you need it for. RMagick on the other hand is bigger, but it also does a lot more. – Stoffe ---
**Author:** ![anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/5fc32e/32.png) [@anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/anakintang)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2007, 12:00am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/whats-the-most-common-library-for-ruby-image-processing/104236/5 "2007-05-18T00:00:41Z")
Giles B. wrote: > Hmm, that’s weird. It looks like you’re right, but why do they make > such a big deal about being better than ImageMagick when IM gets you > such full-featured stuff and ImageScience is so much smaller and > focused? I think ThumbnailScience might have made more sense. Why not > just call it CleanThumb or something? Is it some ego thing? Without having ever played with IS, it could be because RMagick leaks memory so badly as to make it unusable for a wide variety of applications. That’s my experience anyhow. I believe that ImageMagick doesn’t have the same problem, but I haven’t tested that. Bigger does not necessarily mean better, though RMagick’s feature set is wonderful. Clifford H… ---
**Author:** ![anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/5fc32e/32.png) [@anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/anakintang)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2007, 12:29am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/whats-the-most-common-library-for-ruby-image-processing/104236/6 "2007-05-18T00:29:45Z")
Clifford H. wrote: > Without having ever played with IS, it could be because RMagick > leaks memory so badly as to make it unusable for a wide variety > of applications. That’s my experience anyhow. I believe that > ImageMagick doesn’t have the same problem, but I haven’t tested > that. > As of this moment there are no open bug tracks for RMagick memory leaks > on RubyForge. All the RMagick “leaks” I know about are addressed in this > entry in the RMagick Hints & Tips forum: > [http://rubyforge.org/forum/forum.php?thread\_id=1374&forum\_id=1618](http://rubyforge.org/forum/forum.php?thread_id=1374&forum_id=1618). If you know of a leak that isn’t addressed by that tip, I’d love an opportunity to fix it. Would you mind sending me a script that reproduces the leak? I need a script with no extra gems or libraries, just Ruby and RMagick. No Rails, attachment\_fu, file\_column, gruff, scruffy, or whatever. Let me know what O/S you’re on, what version of RMagick and ImageMagick/GraphicsMagick, and what version of Ruby. You can send it directly to me, post it here, or open a bug track on RubyForge. Thanks very much! ---
**Author:** ![anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/5fc32e/32.png) [@anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/anakintang)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2007, 1:47am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/whats-the-most-common-library-for-ruby-image-processing/104236/7 "2007-05-17T01:47:37Z")
> > There’s also ImageScience, which is obviously set up as an > > alternative. Both have their proponents, I think. > > Had a look at the homepage, but it seems it’s just a smallish > thumbnail generator - which is fine, if that’s the only thing you need > it for. RMagick on the other hand is bigger, but it also does a lot > more. Hmm, that’s weird. It looks like you’re right, but why do they make such a big deal about being better than ImageMagick when IM gets you such full-featured stuff and ImageScience is so much smaller and focused? I think ThumbnailScience might have made more sense. Why not just call it CleanThumb or something? Is it some ego thing? – Giles B. I’m running a time management experiment: I’m only checking e-mail twice per day, at 11am and 5pm. If you need to get in touch quicker than that, call me on my cell. Blog: [http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com](http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com) Portfolio: [http://www.gilesgoatboy.org](http://www.gilesgoatboy.org) ---
**Author:** ![anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/5fc32e/32.png) [@anakintang](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/anakintang)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2007, 9:15am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/whats-the-most-common-library-for-ruby-image-processing/104236/8 "2007-05-18T09:15:24Z")
Tim H. wrote: > As of this moment there are no open bug tracks for RMagick memory leaks > If you know of a leak that isn’t addressed by that tip, I’d love an > opportunity to fix it. Would you mind sending me a script Thanks for your support, and when I get back to Australia, I’ll retest my script with the latest RMagick before sending it if necessary. I’m sorry if I slurred an old version when the current version mightn’t deserve it. I had heard of issues from a number of others as well, but I can only relate my experience (which is admittedly out of date). It’ll be a month or so, unfortunately - I’m travelling and can’t test it here on Mac OSX - the problem was on Debian and I think WindowsXP. Clifford H…