Crazy Slow CO5 Performance
I find CO5 incredibly slow as a capture and editing program. Though editing is far more frustrating then capturing.
I am wondering what is the user base consensus on this, and what known tip or tricks are out there to alleviate some the pain?
My last capture session consists of about 1600 images. Captured with a Phase back using 5.0.2.
While editing, paging to the next page of images the thumbnail redraw takes as close to forever as I can stand. Some times over 5 minutes to redraw the new thumbnails. During that process CO5 is completely non-responsive.
It has taken me several hours to select 100 images from my list of 1600. This is not an acceptable workflow.
System info: Mac 8 core, 12 gig ram, 14T raid
Any feedback, tips, support would be really appreciated.
Thanks
Joseph
I am wondering what is the user base consensus on this, and what known tip or tricks are out there to alleviate some the pain?
My last capture session consists of about 1600 images. Captured with a Phase back using 5.0.2.
While editing, paging to the next page of images the thumbnail redraw takes as close to forever as I can stand. Some times over 5 minutes to redraw the new thumbnails. During that process CO5 is completely non-responsive.
It has taken me several hours to select 100 images from my list of 1600. This is not an acceptable workflow.
System info: Mac 8 core, 12 gig ram, 14T raid
Any feedback, tips, support would be really appreciated.
Thanks
Joseph
0
-
[quote="NN137648UL" wrote:
It's taking 15 minutes to generate 90 proxies. It's using 100% of the processor, and damn near all available RAM. It's pathetic.
Create a support case and provide me with your specifics. 15 minutes for 90 files (even P65+ RAW files) is far too long and not what we would expect or suggest is acceptable. As Bob's reported time restraints are no where close to what you have just reported (roughly 16 seconds to your 15 minutes) I would venture to suggest we're dealing with separate concerns.0 -
Drew,
just another data point: on my Win XP (SP 3) machine, using Cap One 5 v 5.1.1, I've just timed the generation of 64 Canon 7D proxies - a tad over 5 minutes, which feels like a long time.
I usually have far more files than that to deal with (often two or three hundred from a shoot) and it can take easily twenty minutes or more before I can save my first conversion.
Interestingly though, once the proxies are done, Cap One is actually faster to save the conversions than Bibble 5 - and sometimes markedly so, if I'm applying NR in Bibble.
Ironic, given that Bibble sells itself on the speed of its conversion!
😉0 -
Keith,
Of my machines here (XP, Win 7, MAC OSX) it' clear that the XP machine is the slowest. Granted this is based on Processor Speed and RAM as opposed to OS but as the machines that were designed to run XP are no longer considered the fastest your reported speed may be the best it can do. I would start a support case and give us your system information file so we can take a closer look.0 -
Hi Drew,
thanks for that.
One other thing I'll mention is that this behaviour (not being able to save a conversion until the proxies are done) wasn't happening in Cap One 4 or earlier versions of Cap One 5.
But... I'm not complaining - everything else is as fast and responsive as I could realistically wish for, so I just do something else while the proxies are created.0 -
Drew, you mentioned my 16 seconds to his 15 minutes. This is incorrect. For me, it is 16 seconds to open and redraw an already cached folder of that 90 images. Before that, I need to wait around minutes on end for that caching to happen.
Something that would likely speed this up, is if the caching files could be working off some internal linking structure. Meaning, we have imagename.raw, imagename.cof and imagename.cop and any renaming would need to be done 3 times. Makes more sense if the .cof and .cop files were just some computer name that doesn't need to be updated. Since there is already a "collect" option within the software, i don't directly need to know which is which.
It would also be great if we could put the job's CaptureOne folder onto some super fast SSD drive, then archive them back together later a month from now.
Right now, I am processing out low resolution JPGs for 755 images and working on another job. There is a significant lag on responsiveness that was not there in previous versions. As I recall, v5.0 juggled both tasks just fine.
We also noticed that if we clicked on a folder, and it cached, when we went back to the folder later, it would try to cache 2 or 3 more images, like it didnt finish the first time. It would do this over and over. This seems like an OS permission type of thing, but if it did the others properly, we aren't sure why these 2 or 3 keep causing a problem.0 -
[quote="Bob6" wrote:
Drew, you mentioned my 16 seconds to his 15 minutes. This is incorrect. For me, it is 16 seconds to open and redraw an already cached folder of that 90 images. Before that, I need to wait around minutes on end for that caching to happen.
Sorry if those times were misconstrued but they were taken directly from your support case, perhaps then even misinterpreted by the supporter? Regardless, the comparison between minutes and a solid 15 is quite different so I think we are comparing apples and oranges between yourself and NN137648UL.
In regard to your suggestions for the placement and function of Proxie Files (COP) and Focus Files (COF) at this time, although appreciated, they are not possible.0 -
Drew it seems that the cache files are causing problems maybe a right click menu item to delete cache files for that thumbnail would be good. This is another topic but I keep getting corrupt cache files when transferring session between stations. It remedy by right click show in finder and the finding the associate cache files and deleting. I scripted this alittle but is be great to have that function in the app. 0 -
Rap,
Right Clicking on the Preview and selecting "Regenerate Preview" doesn't solve the issue?0 -
After testing, I do have one way that consistently speed up working in CP1, making it 4x faster.
Testing Done on Standard Workstation Mac and a shiny new balls-to-the-wall mac:
1. Internal or external FW800 drive did not matter for speed.
2. Proxie caching speed was similar internal/external on both macs (About 5min for 77 images) and did not matter if it was 600px or 2400px sized image cache.
3. What did make a HUGE difference, seemed to be a setting Preferences - Image - Preview Image Size. In theory, making 600px previews would be faster than making 2400px images, but it actually takes four times longer to redraw the screen on 22"+ sized monitors because the CP1 window is so big. At 600px, it appears that it redraws progressively low, medium and high resolution if you stare at the screen. But at 2400px, it goes from Low to High in about 1/10th a second. 600px is over 1 second.
If you are waiting for screen redraws, there is a huge difference. Try this: Start caching a folder at 600px, then change folders. Change the preference to 2400px, then go back and finish caching the folder. When it's done, You can see the difference between which ones used the different settings. The one downside is that the previews go from 700k to 7mb. So, space wise, there is a huge difference. So, the best practice will be to test for your own individual machine.
Hope this helps.0 -
[quote="Drew " wrote:
[quote="NN137648UL" wrote:
It's taking 15 minutes to generate 90 proxies. It's using 100% of the processor, and damn near all available RAM. It's pathetic.
Create a support case and provide me with your specifics. 15 minutes for 90 files (even P65+ RAW files) is far too long and not what we would expect or suggest is acceptable. As Bob's reported time restraints are no where close to what you have just reported (roughly 16 seconds to your 15 minutes) I would venture to suggest we're dealing with separate concerns.
Drew - I created a support case as requested
It's at the point now where I don't use Capture One to sort through images, it's that painfully slow. Half the time it hangs while generating proxies, sometimes recovering, other times not. I've resorted to shooting JPG and RAW, making selects in Bridge using the JPGS, then moving the RAW selects to a separate folder for processing. I shouldn't have to do this.
Unless there's a way to turn off proxy generation, this whole thing is useless.0 -
[quote="Drew " wrote:
Rap,
Right Clicking on the Preview and selecting "Regenerate Preview" doesn't solve the issue?
HEHE. I didnt even see that there! Probably does fix it. Now, can I get back that hour I spent writing a script? Time to reread the user guide.
Bob thats a very interesting test.0 -
i'm having the same performance issues, ever since i got c1 pro (4.5>).
there has got to be something wrong, it's just depressing to excuse for the long waiting periods.
trying to tether on a 5d mkII at fashion-shots ends up in asking the photographer to capture to fast cf cards and then copying them in the finder via a firewire 800 cardreader, because even the importing is extremely slow in c1 5.1.1 .
of course i'd like to offer tethering, creating looks on the fly, croppings, spot removals, rendering jpgs in the background etc. , it's what people would book me for. at the end of the day i have to use bridge for just showing the images and making selections, because it's so much more responsive and stable.
i hope you will fix the performance issue quickly, i feel like a bad digital operator because of it.
i just upgraded my macbook pro to 8gb ram, but i guess that won't help with these issues, since capture one won't even be able to adress the ram as 32bit application? so i'm thinking about upgrading to a pricey ssd (Micron's RealSSD C300 SSD 256GB) just hoping that could help a little?
besides that, i have a feature request for the web-gallery: the ability to create multiple logins per gallery, each one should be able to make selections (stars or colors) and filter for them (also from the other users selections).0 -
[quote="turbo" wrote:
i'm having the same performance issues, ever since i got c1 pro (4.5>).
...
Reports of performance problems most of the time lack what matters most: numbers, figures. OK, it takes long, but HOW long? I mentioned this earlier in this thread (viewtopic.php?p=36698#p36698).
Whether or not extra RAM or an SSD improves performance depends on what is the bottleneck. The program Activity Monitor should give you an indication. HDDs need periodic defragmentation were an SSD does not need this at all (better not).
Please note that feature requests are only registered and passed through by Phase One in a support case. This is a user-to-user forum.0 -
Heh... I would certainly hope that PhaseOne notices the thread with 1400 views titled "Crazy Slow Performance" that has been kicking around for 4 months. If the next update does not address any of these various speed issues it's going to be a real downer.
I had an SSD in here the other day, but since it was Win7 formatted, I could not write to it with the Mac. I really wanted to try that out, too for caching speed test. But, I doubt that is going to fix the direct problem, which seems to me to be more processor, or even video ram related.0 -
[quote="Bob6" wrote:
Heh... I would certainly hope that PhaseOne notices the thread with 1400 views titled "Crazy Slow Performance" that has been kicking around for 4 months. If the next update does not address any of these various speed issues it's going to be a real downer.
From the posts in this thread by Phase One support staff you could conclude that it did not went unnoticed. Whether this will solve the issue remains to be seen. From what I read here is that we deal with a plethora of issues, not a single one, but with a common denominator: performance. I advice users to open a support case and provide details to Phase One. This has worked in the past and will work today.
Whether or not an SSD (or RAM or faster processor) will help in a particular case depends on whether disk (or RAM or processor) performance is the bottleneck. Use Activity Monitor for more information about your system.0 -
Paul,
I just discovered a very versatile, fast conversion-app. I installed CO 3.7.9. Now I'm making my selections with Bridge, conversions with 3.7.9/Camera RAW and that's even better than see the beachball on CO 5.whatever
Maybe someone at Phaseone is watching this thread ("...pls send blahblah.."). BUT there's no improvement since 4.0, the versatility isn't enhanced (the features became more and more but the versatility is worse than 3.7), the app is not as stable as 3.7. and so on.
I heard this "pls send us.." thing quite a long time. I sent. Believe me. I'm tired to be confronted with a bad software, overloaded with features and underpowered user-interface. what the hell with a 3-second development when adjusting the image takes 10 times longer?
I'm tired to be a beta-tester.
I'm tired to sit all night and look at beachballs and "activity"-monitors. The software is to serve me, not the other way.
And I'm tired to loose clients if I can't meet deadlines because of bad software.
So: if there is no significant change in CO to get a snappy, quick reacting (perhaps uuuuh, great effort ... realtime?) application in short time CO is fallen from the best RAW-converter to (at least) one of the worst.
Chreers,
Christian0 -
Christian,
I'm sorry you feel that way, you're frustrated and everyone can understand frustration.
However, the bottom line is Capture One 5 IS an improvement on Capture One 3 and 4 without question. We'd be happy to show you just how it is better but that can't be done unless you give us a chance through a support case. You've stated that you have contacted us but, in searching through your specifics, I can't find any history of direct contact with support.
If you are beyond your patience with Capture One 5 then I will be sorry to see you neglect such a powerful software, however if you still want to investigate further just what is causing your specific issues, we're always here and happy to help.
http://xchange.phaseone.com/content/sup ... nguageid=10 -
i've got another simple example where capture one seems to hang...but then i've been watching the activity monitor and figured that it was reading the whole +10gb images from disk of the active folder on startup. that takes a few minutes on my macbook pro and i only get a beachball until capture one finally shows up. not much processor or memory usage, just disk reads. why does it do that? 0 -
I am the Head of Technical Services at Capture Integration, a Phase One / Leaf dealer (among other products like Cambo/Apple etc).
I thought I'd jump in here with a few thoughts:
- 5.1.1 is very very fast on our Apple machines with a variety of Phase One, Leaf, and Canon files. Of note switching between folders which have been viewed since Capture One was open is nearly instantaneous even if the folder contains many hundred images. If this is not true for you then there must be specific things that are stopping that from being true for you. I'm going to lay out a few common ones below, but I'd encourage you to start a support case and follow their instructions (especially when they ask for information like your system profile) very carefully and they will do everything they can to help. If you bought your software through a dealer (like us) you can also enlist them in this process; I help many of our customers find the source of problems and fix them - often in person at one of our offices (by far the fastest way to troubleshoot).
- notice that there is a Windows > Activities pop up which will show you when C1 is drawing proxies for files. C1 can get backlogged on drawing proxies when you are shooting very fast tethered, when you are importing from a CF card, or when you access a folder with a new version of capture one (if the math in the new version of C1 has been improvedit must redraw the proxies). While it is drawing proxies performance is MUCH slower.
- accessing off an external drive, RAID or not is very rarely the fastest way to work (some very specialized high-performance external storage solutions are faster than internal but it's the exception to the rule). Having an internal drive (or internal RAID) is much more preferable for "online" work (meaning data you are still actively working with as opposed to "offline" data which can be archived for long term storage). Having this be a separate drive than your OS/boot drive is helpful. Also if there is any mis-setting/hardware-problems with your RAID the speed of working from it can grind to a stand still. This doesn't mean you can't work of an external drive or an external RAID, just that if you are doing that and having issues that you should test how performance is on an internal drive to see if that is the source of your problems.
- having massive number of files in one folder is a bad bad idea if performance is a top-priority. I shoot a lot of time-lapse and regularly amass 5-8 thousand raw images in one folder so it is by all means possible. However, if you can use the great tools in Capture One to break your day up into different capture folders and use albums and the move-to folder where appropriate to compare images located in different physical folders that will greatly help your workflow speed. Depending on how big the files are (e.g. 5D mark 1 vs. P65+ is a big leap) you may find the soft limit as low as 200 files or as high as 2000 files (soft limit means that it doesn't stop working if you go one more images, just that this is the point where the interface starts to slow down). This is true of any program (even the finder).
- Capture One 5.1.1 remembers folders (meaning keeps them in RAM) even if they aren't "favorites" (at various points "favorites" have been given variously elevated priority to be kept in RAM). This is great for many users, but can be the source of some performance problems for users who shoot several thousand frames in one session. If you shoot a very very high number of images I suggest you start a new session for each major block of images.
- Rather than simply tagging "select" images I always suggest either moving (apple-J) or copying (hold option and drag) them to a new physical folder marked "selects". If you have multiple capture folders (one for each model for instance) then you can create a subfolder for each capture folder for selects from that capture folder. This is a good idea for multiple reasons (including the fact that the most archival and universal way of marking a raw file as a "select" is to have it located in a different physical or named differently than the rest of the files). It will also greatly enhance the speed of your editing worfklow as you reduce the number of images quite often to a small % of the original total.
- Capture One 3 and Capture One 5 are VERY different programs. Each had it's positives and negatives. Version 3 could show the previews more quickly in many cases, but the previews were AWFUL in comparison to those drawn in version 5 especially for 24" or larger monitors; the previews in version 3 often showed noise/moire/artifacts which were not there and were low in resolution and definition. Version 5 has MUCH better previews, and can process MUCH faster than version 3 (especially true on recent multi-core machines). So when you find one specific area where version 3 was faster try to overcome your frustration and view the totality of differences and I almost guarantee you that you will find version 5 much faster in total workflow
- uninstalling and reinstalling C1 can often eliminate strange problems. Follow our step by step instructions here:
Finally remember that a help forum is a terrible terrible place to asses how well software is working for the general user base. Only people with problems visit forums, and only people with continuous/extended problems post on forums. Our customers have been overwhelming positive about Capture One 5 (early versions of Capture One 4 got less positive reviews) and is very fast for the vast majority of users, none of whom would find themselves here on this forum.0 -
Also, someone mentioned performance when using a large monitor as it relates to preview-image-size. Two notes:
1) when you change preview-image-size (aka proxy size) in preferences that only applies to previews generated in the future. IF you want to regenerate the proxies you'll need to do so manually by deleting those proxies (with C1 closed) in the cache subfolder of the Capture One folder where your raw files are.
2) If the preview size is not large enough to cover the monitor then the raw file itself is being read rather than the preview which will lead to much slower draw times. So you should keep the preview size large enough to fill the size you normally view the images at.0 -
One final note. If your experience was with something earlier than version 5.1.1 (current version as of June 3) I would strongly encourage you to uninstall the previous version and try 5.1.1 as many performance improvements have been made and some specific bugs with specific hardware setups have been addressed.
Uninstall instructions: .0 -
I cannot fathom why 5.1 is slow as molasses but it is. I tried giving another 100 GB free space, going to larger preview thumbs, deleting the cache with CO closed, having CS4 open or not. It takes 30 seconds to a minute for any change to manifest itself in the window with the image about 800 pixels wide. I have put the files to be processed n a "selected CR2" folder, so there's only 20-40 files to deal with at a time. I'm using a Power Mac 16 GB RAM 667 MHZ DDR2 FB -DIMM 2x 2.66 GHZ Dual core Intel Xeon.
Why not post a ticket tonight? Well I'm behind in delivering a job and ended up dong only about 20 files in CO and switched to CS4 ACR and the files were done in 20 minutes what was taking 4 hours! However, that's not what I want as CO does a better job, IMHO!
Tomorrow when the pictures are sized and delivered I can deal with a ticket and hope it's something that I've missed, LOL!I'll try to work on my humble 17" Macbook Pro instead and see it that works faster!
One think that surprises me, and perhaps it's there but I don't see it, I'd expect a panel in preferences, (as found with CS4) with memory, cache and HD management. There also should be a default speed demon mode, where CO is optimized for speed!
Really, this is sad! Hopefully the solution will be obvious to someone here!
Asher0 -
Asher,
When you create a support case we'll take a closer look and get to the bottom of it. However all of Doug's (extensive) information above should serve you well in determining the speed issue.0 -
I'm just very disappointed with all the recent updates. C1 used to be such a great program.
It still does the RAW conversion the best way, some features like CA removal are unique and great.
But because you decided to make it so complex and huge, it acts like anything made by Microsoft.
It's so badly written, it's not even funny. The C1 process takes over my entire Mac just to read images
in one folder. 100% of my CPU taken by ImgCoreProcess and C1 just to read a folder (!).
Way to big and way, way to slow to use. So although I've been a user for many years, I'm giving up on C1.
Sorry.
If you ever decide to make it usable again, drop me a line.
Andrew0 -
[quote="Andrew31" wrote:
The C1 process takes over my entire Mac just to read images
in one folder. 100% of my CPU taken by ImgCoreProcess and C1 just to read a folder (!).
Andrew,
That is not inline with what we would expect. Since you have not created a support case in regard to the issue you have reported above I would welcome you to do so, you know where to find us.0 -
I'm with several here, I absolutely love C1 but it's gotten so slow I've had to ask myself what am I sacrificing for a little bit better image quality over alternatives like Lightroom 3. Basically I came to the point recently that I realized I'm giving up hours of my life for a slight quality difference that probably none of my clients will ever see. So, as of last week I've started using lightroom and I find myself getting through projects much faster thanks to it's speedy interface and the local adjustments it has that I used to have to do in PS. I've been a C1 evangelist for a few years now and very anti-lightroom, but hours with my family and friends are not worth a slightly better quality to my photos. I still like C1 better but I just can't sit around and wait anymore. Please fix this Phase One! I want to come back to C1! 0 -
[quote="Zach2" wrote:
it's gotten so slow I've had to ask myself what am I sacrificing for a little bit better image quality over alternatives like Lightroom 3.
Hi Zach,
if you spend even just a few minutes in the Lightroom forum, you'll realise that there are loads of current ongoing complaints about LR 3 being desperately slow to the point of unusability - it's not a simple case of "Lightroom fast, Cap One slow".
My point being that it might not be Cap One that's your problem, it might be the machine and the environment it is running on.
Certainly on my machine, Cap One 5 is impressively fast compared to Lr 3 - Lr 3 is fine, but Cap One is markedly quicker.
I do share other contributors' concerns about the delay caused by the initial proxy building process: but once that's done, Cap One flies along faster than Lr 3 or Bibble 5, which sells itself on speed - and on big files too, from my Canon 7D.0 -
I can only speak of my own experience, which is on a 17" Macbook Pro 3.06 ghz with a 23" ACD external display and 4 GB of RAM. With a typical wedding loaded into C1, about 300 photos, the whole program just lags. If I adjust any setting, I have to wait 3-4 seconds each time to see the change. This definitely gets old! Most things in LR are nearly instant. I don't use either program to organize my photos, so both are constantly getting new libraries/sessions for speed. As far as how long it takes to output the finished files, I could care less about that, I can just go run an errand or something. And let's not forget that loading 300 files into C1 means Proxy generation for 10-15 mins.
Just being able to do local exposure adjustments in LR without having to go into photoshop saves me a ton of time, regardless of either program's speed. Often I'll have to make two outputs of the same file from C1, 1 for the bride's dress and one for everything else, and then combine them in PS. I can skip this whole step in LR.
Still, the skin tones in C1 just kill everything else, I'm really hoping this improves!0 -
[quote="Zach2" wrote:
I can only speak of my own experience,
Oh sure thing, Zach - but as I say, it's not a simple "this software is faster than that software - fix it" situation.0 -
Well, on my computer, with my workflow, with brand new sessions and everything set just right, it is exactly a "this software is faster than that software" situation. Lightroom loads 300 RAWs in seconds, C1 in 15 mins. LR reflects adjustments almost instantaneously, C1 is at least a few seconds if not many each time I change something. C1 is just generally kind of slow and laggy and LR is zippy and instant. I'm sure if I bogged either down with huge libraries I'd get the complaints that the people in forums whine about, but with empty sessions the truth really comes out for me. 0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
61 comments