Skip to main content

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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

Slow / no refresh with clone / heal layers

Christophe Blondel
Hello,
When I use clone or heal layers, photo is not refreshed automatically (or it takes a very long time) when brushing to modify the mask. It gets updated if I press 'M' twice to display / hide the mask.
The reactivity has really nothing to do with what it is supposed to be from the tutorial video. It makes the feature almost unusable.
Please help!

Version: C1 Pro for Sony
OS: Win 7 Pro 64-bits
Processor: Intel Core i5 2400
RAM: 8 Go DDR3
0

Comments

18 comments

Date Votes
  • Paul Steunebrink
    This is a feature that only works with pretty powerful machines in my opinion/experience. I am sorry to say that an i5 does not qualify for that, while 8 GB RAM is also not helping either.
    0
  • Christophe Blondel
    [quote="Paul_Steunebrink" wrote:
    This is a feature that only works with pretty powerful machines in my opinion/experience. I am sorry to say that an i5 does not qualify for that, while 8 GB RAM is also not helping either.

    Thanks for the reply.
    I would understand it works 5 times slower than on the video, but it just does not refresh, not even the brushing is shown in real time. I need to press twice 'M' or to zoom in and out to see the brushing updated and the result on the photo (seems like triggering the refresh event).
    Even when I delete a heal / clone layer, I need to 'enforce' the refresh. I hope deleting a layer does not require an i7 to refresh in less than 10 seconds!
    0
  • SFA
    I would suggest creating a Support Case with Phase One. They will probably ask for the log files so they can assess what is happening during the process in your system and compare that with expected results.

    Using the version you are using I assume you are working with quite large Raw files so the Memory allocation available (or access to it) may be relatively constrained if you have other applications running at the same time. The specifications of a system in isolation from other activities in process, may not be a great guide as to expectations.

    But there could be many other factors in play for which some adjustments or alternative approaches may help .

    For example if you change the zoom level of the display when the changes are being processed does that make any difference?

    You may also need to establish whether your graphics card (assuming your machine has one that supports OpenCL) is in use or bypassed.

    A support case should prove to be the most effective way to get some feedback about all of the settings and performance issues that are of importance to you here.

    HTH.



    Grant
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    OP, the whole notion your system is not fast enough is false. I have an ultrabook with i5 and only 4 gigs of mem. The clone and heal layers apply pretty quickly. Heck, the whole workflow in C1 is fast compared to Lightroom.

    I realize this doesn't answer your question. Just don't let anyone convince you your system specs is not fast enough. Something to consider is maybe you just need to do a fresh install of your OS....as a last resort.
    0
  • Robert Whetton
    [quote="Paul_Steunebrink" wrote:
    This is a feature that only works with pretty powerful machines in my opinion/experience. I am sorry to say that an i5 does not qualify for that, while 8 GB RAM is also not helping either.

    My i5 does just fine, and 8GB RAM? why? i don't see C1 hitting that even when working with multiple adjustments
    https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-yo-vSW0LeyI/VFOy7or8n_I/AAAAAAAAUDU/F3GuUZxjFZ8/w382-h46-no/CaptureOne%2Bmem%2Busage.jpg
    0
  • SFA
    Just to mention that the specific models of Intel processors can have hugely different performance profiles as will the components and boards they are connected to. That means it may or may not be useful for any general comparisons to be made. I fully expect my currently extremely fast 3 series i7 to look horribly slow by the time we get to systems that are capable of getting the best of of a 5series chip ...



    Grant
    0
  • mli20
    It's illuminating to take a peek at the system requirements for some competing products...

    ACDSee Pro 8: Intel Pentium 4, 512 MB-1GB Ram
    Lightroom 5: Intel Pentium, 2-8GB Ram
    PaintShop Pro X7: Intel 1.5 GHz processor, 2-4GB Ram

    ..focusing here at processor type (Intel make only) and minimum/recommended amount of memory. Is Capture One 8 really such a resource hog compared to its peers?

    Cheers,
    Mogens
    0
  • SFA
    Potentially you can run anything on much lower than ideal specification.

    However if you are processing for top end large files things may take a while. How acceptable that may be depends entirely in the user.

    Anyone pitching a product to the market that seems to be constrained by older equipment may wish to appear to love everyone. However most C1 users seems to expect instant seamless response and complain that LR, for example (I've read the comment several times today) , is too slow despite running on equipment that is presumably well above the minimum specification.

    It's never easy trying to compare specs on paper or user experiences based on - well, almost anything except real measured results.

    IMO.


    Grant
    0
  • mli20
    My PC configuration:

    Intel i5-3450 processor at 3.1 GHz
    16 GB RAM
    Solid-state harddrive for software
    Images and other workfiles on an external spinning disk at 5400rpm, USB3 connection.

    Never have performance issues, it just happily trundles along.

    However, I have at times seen C18 grabbing as much as 6.5 GB of memory. Oh boy, will that slow a machine with say 4-8 GB down. In that light, a recommendation of 16 GB makes sense.

    What doesn't make sense to me though is why C18 is grabbing those 6.5 GB. Thus I am inclined to consider C18 a resource hog.

    Cheers,
    Mogens
    0
  • Christophe Blondel
    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    HTH.
    Grant

    It does help... I'll open a support case!
    0
  • Christophe Blondel
    Thanks to all for your hints.
    Despite my PC is not the very latest standard, I am convinced this feature is not working well for me.

    By the way when I enforce the refresh by pressing M twice or zooming, the refresh takes around one second. When I brush, it just does not refresh, or it takes around 15 seconds... There is something wrong there.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="NN635465470335774475UL" wrote:
    Thanks to all for your hints.
    Despite my PC is not the very latest standard, I am convinced this feature is not working well for me.

    By the way when I enforce the refresh by pressing M twice or zooming, the refresh takes around one second. When I brush, it just does not refresh, or it takes around 15 seconds... There is something wrong there.


    What settings are you using when brushing?

    Mask Always displayed or Never displayed ? (The "M" toggle)

    Only display when drawing?

    If you are not displaying the mask and so "painting directly" there is a good chance that you will see a delay of some sort since C1 has to decide at what point you have "finished" each adjustment stroke and then apply the adjustment(s) currently set. Or, more specifically, collect all the data once again and recalculate from the base up.

    This will appear to be slower than painting a mask and then changing the settings or extending a mask for existing settings etc, where the mask can be quickly displayed and we will probably not recognise the recalculating process going on for a few seconds longer. It does inherently seems a little slower when covering a large area but find when making adjustments to small areas.

    I'm not suggesting that there is nothing to investigate BUT one needs to be aware that the perception of the speed of operation can suggest that things are much slower than expected because how we see what is going on may not be understood on a like for like basis and we need to take that into account.

    In a slightly different context I ran some perception tests to compare 2 other applications a few years ago. One of them took all the latest settings, did its stuff and then presented the results and many deemed it to be slow in a comparison. However the 'faster' program was giving the appearance of almost instant processing by doing what seemed to be the easiest adjustments right at the start to show something (anything would do ...) and then trickling in the rest of the adjustment surreptitiously in the background at almost imperceptible levels of visibility. The total elapsed time for both programs was much the same although often the "slow" application was in fact faster than the "fast" one to complete the task.

    There may be a combination of factors in your situation but I'm sure we (or rather one hopes the Support Team) can arrive at either a sensible explanation or a way to make things faster.


    Grant
    0
  • mli20
    If a piece of software is this complicated to come to grips with it is not for the average user.

    If a software vendor cannot protect its customers from having to deal with such minute technical detail...

    Cheers,
    Mogens
    0
  • Christophe Blondel
    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    What settings are you using when brushing?

    Mask Always displayed or Never displayed ? (The "M" toggle)

    Only display when drawing?

    If you are not displaying the mask and so "painting directly" there is a good chance that you will see a delay of some sort since C1 has to decide at what point you have "finished" each adjustment stroke and then apply the adjustment(s) currently set. Or, more specifically, collect all the data once again and recalculate from the base up.
    Grant


    Thanks for your message.

    I have tried with both settings for the mask display... it behaves the same.
    What really makes me wonder is that:
    - it happens as well for clone layers, which should not be so computationally demanding
    - it refreshes quite fast (1 second) when 'enforcing' the refresh by pressing 'M' twice or by zooming in or out
    0
  • SFA
    Well, it sounds like the Support Case route is the most desirable path to take. Anything else would just be speculative guesswork.

    It may simply be that for some reason the computed output is not synchronising back to the display in a timely fashion - unless forced. But understand why that might be (if it is indeed the cause) may require some more detailed analysis, based on an in-depth appreciation of what is meant to happen, then is likely to be available amongst the membership of the forum.

    Please keep us informed about general progress with the Support Case for future reference.


    Grant
    0
  • Christophe Blondel
    I have opened the Support Case yesterday. I will keep you posted of the outcome.
    Cheers.
    0
  • Robert Whetton
    [quote="mli20" wrote:

    However, I have at times seen C18 grabbing as much as 6.5 GB of memory. Oh boy, will that slow a machine with say 4-8 GB down. In that light, a recommendation of 16 GB makes sense.

    I believe C1 8 has a memory leak! i've been editing on a set of images, and started off at 1.5GB usage and just looked again and it was nearly at 5.5GB and im not doing anything taxing, cropping, white balance and exposure adjustments..

    restarted and now back at 1.5GB usage again..
    0
  • Christophe Blondel
    Support case is now closed.
    It was coming from a corrupted catalog. When importing the same photo in a new catalog, the issue does not occur, refreshes are now going fast! (even with my i5).
    Thanks for your help.
    0

Post is closed for comments.