purrmitive

Use purrmitive as lib

purrmitive = "*"

or install purr as binary

cargo install --bin purr --features="cli" purrmitive

or

cargo run --release --features=cli --bin=purr -- -i ./assets/input.png -o output.gif -n 100

most primitive flags are supported, it should be a dropin replacement in most cases.

USAGE:
    purr [FLAGS] [OPTIONS] -i <input> -n <number> -o <output>

FLAGS:
    -h, --help       Prints help information
    -v               the level of verbosity, v/vv/vvv
    -V, --version    Prints version information

OPTIONS:
    -a <alpha>             alpha value
    -b <background>        starting background color (hex)
    -i <input>             input image
    -m <mode>              mode: 0=combo 1=triangle 2=rect 3=ellipse 4=circle 5=rotatedrect 6=beziers 7=rotatedellipse
                           8=polygon(default 1)
    -n <number>            number of shapes
    -o <output>            output image
    -r <resize>            input size
    -s <size>              output size
    -j <thread>            numebr of threads

Output Formats:

png, jpg, svg and gif are all supported. You can also include {} in output file name, for example, -o "/tmp/out/out{}.png" will save every frame in that directory as /tmp/out/outX.png X in range of [1, n]

Example

using

-i ./assets/input.png -o output.gif -n 150

primitive	input image	output image	process
triangle
ellipse

try it yourself for more.

Differences

Output Difference

All the graphs supported by primitive are implemented, and the output of all graphs (except the bezier curves) is basically the same.

The original primitive version of bezier curves supports line thickness adjustment, which is not possible in purr. But the result is still not bad.

Usage Difference

The key options and parameters of purr are the same as primitive, and in most cases you can just replace primitive with purr.

The rest of the parameters not listed above have not been implemented yet(these parameters will be supported in the future)

Performance Difference

All types of graphical fits are faster than primitive on my computer. See the next section for more specific data.

One possible factor is that in my implementation, the "next-step" buffer is skiped, by modified the diff function. It costs less comapring to copy the current buffer, update it then read it.

About Performance

This program is CPU intensive, it does all rendering in memory.

Purr is faster than the original implementation.

Benchmark using -n 100 -m {0-8}, see the results below.

hyperfine --parameter-scan m 0 8 -D 1 './target/release/purr -i ./assets/input.png -o assets/purr.{m}.png -n 100 -m {m}' '~/go/bin/primitive -i ./assets/input.png -o assets/primitive.{m}.png -n 100 -m {m}' --export-json benchmark.json

Command	Mode	Mean [s]	Min [s]	Max [s]	result
purr	combo	10.256 ± 0.385	9.202	10.467
primitive	combo	15.068 ± 0.213	14.785	15.405
purr	triangle	6.927 ± 0.201	6.510	7.136
primitive	triangle	10.577 ± 0.266	10.109	10.879
purr	rect	6.224 ± 0.087	6.132	6.380
primitive	rect	7.505 ± 0.105	7.388	7.765
purr	ellipse	12.516 ± 0.098	12.354	12.674
primitive	ellipse	14.643 ± 0.279	14.189	15.193
purr	circle	15.054 ± 0.236	14.739	15.452
primitive	circle	17.375 ± 0.187	17.156	17.760
purr	rotatedrect	8.045 ± 0.081	7.938	8.220
primitive	rotatedrect	9.181 ± 0.154	8.922	9.496
purr	beziers	3.050 ± 0.127	2.815	3.223
primitive	beziers	11.951 ± 0.173	11.563	12.114
purr	rotatedellipse	12.282 ± 0.166	11.942	12.496
primitive	rotatedellipse	27.795 ± 0.401	27.273	28.694
purr	polygon	8.355 ± 0.219	7.988	8.748
primitive	polygon	15.995 ± 0.275	15.426	16.431