Normal
scoop, I agreee with you. I replaced most of the code with what I had suggested and the performance is litle better or the same, the performance was pretty much the same(this was with about 60 images in one folder).One thing I don't get in the code is there is a thread sleeper for 1000 milliseconds, maybe you know better then I, but why is that?Still I thing the function that I provided is better, at least for those people that have realy many pictures.The reason that I think it's better is that, from my experiense it costs a lot less cpu power then Image.GetImage()
scoop, I agreee with you. I replaced most of the code with what I had suggested and the performance is litle better or the same, the performance was pretty much the same(this was with about 60 images in one folder).
One thing I don't get in the code is there is a thread sleeper for 1000 milliseconds, maybe you know better then I, but why is that?
Still I thing the function that I provided is better, at least for those people that have realy many pictures.
The reason that I think it's better is that, from my experiense it costs a lot less cpu power then Image.GetImage()
