C1 6.4.4 Very slow on med-large shoots /directories
I have a session with 2084 images. The first 500 or so load quickly and then get progressively slower. The whole process takes just over 12 min as long as I don't try to use C1. If I try to use C1 in ANY way it will take longer or simply hang. These are on a local image dedicated drive with virus scan disabled.
The same happens with other large directories/sessions.
I7
16gig ram
Drives < half full
Please Advise
The same happens with other large directories/sessions.
I7
16gig ram
Drives < half full
Please Advise
0
-
While I don't have such large sessions (usually a few hundred at a time), your time sounds about right. I just bought a new laptop with a SSD for the programs. I leave the photos on a high speed spinner. This has sped up the loading quite a bit, though it is still measured in minutes, not seconds. I have not done any quantitative measurements. I also know that the new Lightroom is slower than CO to load.
I may try to put the photos on the SSD in a temp folder and see what happens, though right now I just wait and go do something else while they load.0 -
lightroom 4x is virtually unusably slow for me and I like the results from C1 (and DXO) but it would be nice if I could start working while the rest of the images load. If anyone has a way to make that happen please let me know. BTW most of my sessions are <200 but I have six Sessions that are >2000 on my plate currently and another four coming up VERY soon. So time is critical for me to find a working solution. Thank you in advance for your help. 0 -
When I used V5 I would regularly get crashes with folder containing more than about 1200 images - especially if I became impatient to do something with them!
V6 seems stable and on my lowly specified machine with 32bit Windows the load spedd drops off but not really by much.
Do you load (Import?) everything into the same folder? I find splitting across folders can spread the load for practical use.
Do you have any smart albums set up? I suspect that, along with Windows systems indexing and the creation of the edit and thumbnail files in the background things can get quite busy so anything that may defer some of the desirable features until after importation would be good. Likewise when opening an existing folder or favourite I suspect (but can't be totally sure) that we do not see a simple "read the file as it was last saved and display it" process since the workspace settings may have changed.
Also on import there are processes to be applied - some automatically - on top of the interpetation of the files being imported. Meta data to add maybe, Styles to be applied, Auto adjustments maybe too. That sort of thing, all of which will add loading to the system and slow both the process and the processing simply because of the workload.
Having said that it would be great to have some practical application performance guidance set out. However beyong a basic (or sometimes detailed) recommended specification I have yet to find any vendor that covered performance in any detail, not even generic detail. I suspect that there are too many variables in the mix and so too much danger of large amounts of resource being sucked into impossible-t-resolve discussions.
I still live in hope that one day performance issues will become easier to uderstand and work around.
Grant0 -
I am in the habit of making one folder = one job. I am also new to media pro and so am rethinking my entire workflow. When you divide a job into multiple folders how do you break it down? I have tried
1 import to one folder with media pro
2 sort/rate
3 move rejects to sub folder
4 create session in c1 with non rejects
This is backward from the videos and media pro is slow going image to image so I am in need of an idiot proof faster process for large jobs.0 -
I don't have MediaPro.
I usually set up a new C1 session and then import to that using whatever grouping into folders that seems appropriate for that collection of images.
Typically I will create one folder per camera used per card per day as a start point. For my set up that means that not folder will have more than about 1100 RAW files in it when I start the assessment process. Some will have much smaller quantities. (If I also have jpg files from certain cameras where I run RAW + Jpg I might add all the jpgs to a single folder if I do anything with them. They are mainly for backup in case of RAW failure so I am less worried about how I deal with them and rarely open them in C1.)
Whilst I could, somewhere in the workflow, combine the images in separate folders into a single folder it is not often that I do except for the outputs. I find it doesn't really matter, for my purposes, if the is no folder consolidation. In fact keeping the folders smaller and having date and camera separation can be useful but that might depend on what you are shooting and how you will be working with the results. I tend not to use the Selects folder. I do use Smart Folder filtering for some things - mainly connected with output processing when selecting a group of images from within a folder. I almost always use the star rating option to identify presentable images. Subselection for output processing I make when required using colour tags when and only when required. I rarely add tags or comments to images. For most of my stuff it wouodl take quite a lot of effort for no obvious regular long term benefit but I appreciate that in other circumstances tags and description could be very important.
However as I am doing all of this in C1 and you are doing it in Media Pro we have different starting points in C1 and I have no idea how introducing MP would influence my workflow approach.
I don't by any means claim that my approach is the best - or even good in any way. But I can work with it for large shoots.
For smaller more random activities I may simply set up a session and then import from any cameras used and over a period of time into a single folder. For instance when testing a camera and lens combination or trying out a particular approach or techinque or, mostly for personal stuff, small collections of images of a subject or genre taken over an extended period of time. I use folder and file naming to identify the files and subject matter. Not a perfect system, but flexible and suits working with other editing products I deploy from time to time.
Grant0 -
Quick update... installing the Microsoft codec for canon fixed this issue and the slowness of media pro. 0 -
[quote="NN634756744767534272UL" wrote:
Quick update... installing the Microsoft codec for canon fixed this issue and the slowness of media pro.
Ah, so you had a very very slow system?
Was that the Canon RAW viewer codec or something else?
Grant0 -
I wouldn't call my system slow by any means. C1 and MP were slow. It was the MS codex for Canon cameras. Not the Canon version. was that your question? 0 -
*codec 0 -
[quote="NN634756744767534272UL" wrote:
I wouldn't call my system slow by any means. C1 and MP were slow. It was the MS codex for Canon cameras. Not the Canon version. was that your question?
I meant that the entire system, when working with C1, was slow not just some part of the C1 process.
It was not so long ago that Canon produced a codec that allowe Windows users to see thumbnails of RAW files. As far as I know that codec excludes a few very early camera RAW files and would presumably need to be updated for each new camera release - just like the RAW converter programs I guess.
Previously this would, perhaps, have been a lesser problem for windows because it would simply decide it could not recognise the file and skip over it quickly. But now that a CR2 file is maybe something it expects to recognise it likely tries to run the "extract" and fails to get a result. But probably tries for a while maybe before defaulting to s generic setting? I'm guessing here, but I have noticed that even with relatively old CR2 files on my system a straight windows directory view of a newly created folder is rather slow. I am suspicious that the codec, whether supplied by Canon or from the Microsoft/Windows support area, adds another layer of processing and will require regular updating to maintain compatibility with RAW files from new cameras as they are developed. What they are doing about lens correction I don't know. I guess if they stick with the internal thumbnail jpg from the RAW file it will have been dealt with for cameras that must have corrections applied for them to be acceptable. Go beyond that embedded size and things could be a little trickier - effectively the display would have to either upscale the embedded jpg or fully convert the RAW file. The latter is probably rather a lot to ask of a file browser!
If anyone has any inside knowledge about this I for one would love to understand what is going on in such a process.
Grant
Grant0 -
The Canon Codec did not work on 64bit systems so I have been without a Windows Browser preview for a LOOONG time. C1 was only slow with the initial populating of the browser - after that all was well. 0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
11 comments