Zum Hauptinhalt gehen

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

Masking performance

Kommentare

33 Kommentare

  • racin06
    I'm at 3840 x 2160 as well.
    0
  • Wesley
    If one still has issues with latest driver than you'll also want to try rolling back to a prior one.

    All in all, CO has always needed more catalog and masking optimization.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="racin06" wrote:
    I'm at 3840 x 2160 as well.


    That means the processing will be working with a lot of pixels.

    The nature of Luma masking is not exactly a "process lite" concept in that regard.

    And presumably any scaling has to be managed after that processing as well?

    Personally speaking I have become less and less convinced about the benefits of high resolution screens in small sizes. For editing work the extra screen real estate running 4k at something like 40 inches without scaling might make some sense for displaying more tools on screen and for viewing large images results large and with quality. But for core editing and first pass masking I'm not convinced that most users really benefit especially if the primary objective is processing speed.

    Just my thoughts. YMMV


    Grant
    0

Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.