iMacRetina - C1 is unusable
The software is too slow to really work with. Editing works rather smoothly if You do not have to high demands, but scrolling through your library is just a joke. If I go through my thumbnails in the filmstrip the picture needs about 0.5 to 1.5 secs to render in the viewer. You can imagine that this is not working for me, as the point in a DAM Software is to be able to quickly scroll through pics to decide, catalog, etc.
I work on the high end iMac Retina Late 2014, 32GB, 4 GHz Intel Core i7, AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB. From just slowly scrolling through the filmstrip in Activity-Monitor CPU Percentage for C1 jumps to 300%-400%, Memory-Usage ist at 11.2GB.
My catalog is on the internal SSD, the pictures on an external thunderbolt SSD. My pictures are from a NIKON D810, the previews are set to 5120 Px.
I tried to toggle OpenCL support, does not change anything. Any help or advice is appreciated. I really would like to continue to use C1, as the picture quality achieved with the processing engine is outstanding.
I work on the high end iMac Retina Late 2014, 32GB, 4 GHz Intel Core i7, AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB. From just slowly scrolling through the filmstrip in Activity-Monitor CPU Percentage for C1 jumps to 300%-400%, Memory-Usage ist at 11.2GB.
My catalog is on the internal SSD, the pictures on an external thunderbolt SSD. My pictures are from a NIKON D810, the previews are set to 5120 Px.
I tried to toggle OpenCL support, does not change anything. Any help or advice is appreciated. I really would like to continue to use C1, as the picture quality achieved with the processing engine is outstanding.
0
-
Has anyone who has entered a support ticket got back any information shedding light on this? Do they have suggestions? Is there any confirmation of a memory leak or performance problem? 0 -
[quote="dimitri" wrote:
Can I go back to CO8?
If you don't have the v8 setup anymore you can download it from Phase One website. But likely the v9 catalog does not work with CO9 software so try to take a catalog backup made with v8.
cheers
BeO0 -
[quote="BobRockefeller" wrote:
Has anyone who has entered a support ticket got back any information shedding light on this? Do they have suggestions? Is there any confirmation of a memory leak or performance problem?
No. Two weeks after reporting the issue about memory usage and performance I got a notification by email but when I checked all I saw is that status is now 'waiting for client'. Not sure what they are waiting for. Did not get a question or response from support.
Similar performance related issues of C1 8.x last year just got a response like:I will send you email through to development so they can look at the possability of alternatives for future releases of Capture One.
We are always trying to improve our software.
And then those tickets get status 'Problem resolved' without actually being resolved. 😕0 -
[quote="harald_walker" wrote:
[quote="BobRockefeller" wrote:
Has anyone who has entered a support ticket got back any information shedding light on this? Do they have suggestions? Is there any confirmation of a memory leak or performance problem?
No. Two weeks after reporting the issue about memory usage and performance I got a notification by email but when I checked all I saw is that status is now 'waiting for client'. Not sure what they are waiting for. Did not get a question or response from support.
Similar performance related issues of C1 8.x last year just got a response like:I will send you email through to development so they can look at the possability of alternatives for future releases of Capture One.
We are always trying to improve our software.
And then those tickets get status 'Problem resolved' without actually being resolved. 😕
Harald,
The first part of your post suggests that you should be able to see an update from support that probably asks for you to answer some questions of provide some further specified files.
If you cannot see such a request (or any notes from support related to the post) then reply and tell them you cannot see anything.
The second part - "Problem resolved" is, I suspect, simply a process terminology problem.
You do not have a resolution to your problem BUT support have done what they are expected to do and taken the issue as far as they can. It has been passed to the the development team for consideration and you have been advised.
That's it.
You can accept that and await some new development with great anticipation or look at it and assume nothing will ever happen. Which will depend on whether you are a "glass half full" or "glass half empty" person.
Under the rules of engagement the support people can do no more. There is no purpose in leaving the Support Call open.
The wording of the status may seem peculiar but then any wording probably would be easy to criticise.
I speak from experience having at one point in my life had responsibilities as a Service Manager in a software development environment with a multinational client base. There was NO terminology that we could find that sent the right "message" to everyone. And we were dealing with a comparatively small number of corporate clients the majority of which were primarily English speakers (or so they claimed!).
I could make a good case for Problem Resolution process status descriptions to be issued as numbers with a different (possibly meaningless) "description" to be associated with the number depending upon the viewer's preferred language setting.
I have no idea whether such an approach would be helpful or not.
Grant0 -
[quote="BobRockefeller" wrote:
Has anyone who has entered a support ticket got back any information shedding light on this? Do they have suggestions? Is there any confirmation of a memory leak or performance problem?
I openend a support case last week. Support asked me to reinstall C1v9.0.2. I did it but the issue is still there on iMac and MBA, too.
IP0 -
I have also opened a support case related to performance with no result. This issue is present from rev 7 which is when I started with C1. So it is safe to assume it is not going away. For me the worst is performance deterioration as you keep working with images. Sliders go from moving in real time with an instant on screen result to being unable to even move the slider. You can drag it for all you want and it just sits there before finally and leisurely moving across. Another 3-5 seconds for the screen to refresh. This starts to happen after processing a batch of images, say 30+. Top spec iMac with 32Gb of RAM and SSD.
Exiting and reloading C1 "fixes" the issue for another batch of images. None of that was ever happening with Lightroom or Aperture. So frustrating.
I wonder if it also exists on Windows...0 -
I also have horrible performance on my 4K display on my 2013 6-core Mac Pro. Both preview rendering, and once an image gets several adjustments or a few local layers it's unworkable 🤬 . Try freehand rotating such an image to straighten it out... LOL. You can get a coffee between refreshes. 😁
Besides poor performance on large 4K and 5K displays, there's also some bugs where beach balls will require a force-quit.
C1P v8 on my 2013 2-core MacBook Pro actually performs way better than v9 on my desktop Mac. I'm not sure if the issue is with 4K and 5K displays, but that's where they should start. When v8 came out, it had similar issues. I wish we didn't need to go through this frustration every year.
I think it's time for Phase One to rewrite their preview rendering engine. If you compare C1P adjustment performance with any other app out there, it's embarrassing. There's obviously better ways to handle previews, and C1P ain't using them.0 -
[quote="VirtualRain" wrote:
C1P v8 on my 2013 2-core MacBook Pro actually performs way better than v9 on my desktop Mac.
Do you have the same preview size in the preferences on both machines?0 -
[quote="VirtualRain" wrote:
I think it's time for Phase One to rewrite their preview rendering engine. If you compare C1P adjustment performance with any other app out there, it's embarrassing. There's obviously better ways to handle previews, and C1P ain't using them.
I'm not quite sure about this but the problem might lay behind that they want to write a cross platform software, with minimal changes can run on both Windows and Mac OS.
To be honest, I was expecting they'd use full power of available methods, such as newly introduced Metal, when they introduced us with v9.0 -
So is this an issue largely in the context of previews and high-rez (4k or 5k) screens? Does anything change if the screen resolution is lowered?
I'm very interested in this recent iMac 5k and would also use my NEC 27" with it. Wonder if working on the NEC as my primary screen for C1 (making use of the iMac's screen for video editing, etc.) if some of this would be alleviated...0 -
[quote="whergt" wrote:
So is this an issue largely in the context of previews and high-rez (4k or 5k) screens? Does anything change if the screen resolution is lowered?
I'm very interested in this recent iMac 5k and would also use my NEC 27" with it. Wonder if working on the NEC as my primary screen for C1 (making use of the iMac's screen for video editing, etc.) if some of this would be alleviated...
Don't think it is. My iMac is the last pre-retina and has serious performance issues while editing. Not sure to what degree editing performance is tied to screen resolution. And the fact that exiting and re-loading C1 "fixes" the issue for another 10-15 minutes clearly points towards inefficient resource management.0 -
FWIW, came to the forum because I have the same issue on my MBP Retina. Any modification (e.g. exposure) or simply changing the photo from the thumbnail, gives a very blurry screen for 2-10 seconds before the photo is displayed/updated.
Very annoying, was hoping to find a solution here on the forum. Has there been any acknowledgement from Phase One on this issue?0 -
I've noted that one of the main issues on my iMac 5K is that C1 doesn't seem to release memory when no catalog is open and it's supposedly idle. I regularly see memory usage around 12Gb whilst working, but this figure doesn't change when I 'exit' the catalog(s). I've sent evidence to PhaseOne support and they've confirmed it's an issue. This could point to problems with resource usage which 'might' solve some other issues we've been noticing. I'll post again if I get any more response from support. 0 -
Same problem over here. I use the MBP 2014 with 32gb ram and fastest GPU.
When I tether and want to switch tabs (from color balans to crop for instance) I get the beach ball and need to wait around 5 seconds before the TAB is switched.... When the camera is disconnected the software is faster.
But when I compare it with the MacPro.... the Mac Pro is like 4 times faster!!!
How is this possible.. I almost want to switch back to Lightroom since its speed is increased in the latest version ☹️ Speed is most important for me when working in the field0 -
[quote="Polyfemos" wrote:
FWIW, came to the forum because I have the same issue on my MBP Retina. Any modification (e.g. exposure) or simply changing the photo from the thumbnail, gives a very blurry screen for 2-10 seconds before the photo is displayed/updated.
Very annoying, was hoping to find a solution here on the forum. Has there been any acknowledgement from Phase One on this issue?
Are you using an external display or do you also have it on the internal retina display? If external, what kind of display?
I don't experience such problems on my 2013 rMBP. (catalogs on local SSD, RAW files on external thunderbolt disk, on internal as well as external display, but not a 4K display).
So far this thread offers a wild collection of hardware configurations, different workflows and settings. Hard to keep an overview and draw conclusions. Would be good to setup a fact sheet.0 -
Exactly. It would be very helpful if people would describe what they are running as generic descriptions aren't. Model, year, gpu, amount of RAM, etc.
For kicks, I'm running a HackPro with 4.2 ghz, 32gb ram, an ancient AMD 5870, El Capitain, C1 9, and a NEC 27" wide gamut monitor. C1 catalog and RAW images are on the same internal RAID and the whole thing is quite responsive. There might be some lag when previews are building, but after that, all adjustments are quite fast.
I'm interested in moving on from Hackintosh land for the issue that sometimes arise and the new iMac 5k is very tempting with a 4.0 ghz, 40 gb ram and the 4 gb vram card. FCPX would be faster than on my Hack but this thread (along with issues I've ready about Adobe issues too) has given me pause.
Lastly, the improvements to v9 over v8 in terms of Luma curve and other adjustments and what I'm able to achieve in skin tones accordingly is massive to me. Some people's logic of "stick with v8" just doesn't cut it as an approach to me and shouldn't for others.0 -
What, if any, consideration has been given to comparing not just hardware specs but other applications - foreground AND background - that might be running at the same time?
How disc drives are configured and, if external, connected.
Any "security" or similar configurations.
Network constraints in some cases?
Whether large catalogs have been allowed to complete their "set up" activities since they were created ....
What peripherals are attached that might be trying to be "smart" but are just getting in the way?
Many, many questions that may not all be relevant. But the chances that all systems are the same are probably not so accurate even in well controlled Appleworld.
Grant0 -
Sell me your 3 years old Dell, Grant...😊 0 -
[quote="BeO" wrote:
Sell me your 3 years old Dell, Grant...😊
You can still get them from the Dell outlet! (Or these days the channel partners who are pushing out the manufacturer refurbished units.)
The specifications can require some patience waiting for the right one to appear ... 😕 When I see 2 more good ones I'll let you know - just as soon as I have completed my order for one of them .... 😉
I would guess older spec Macs are available too but the OSX updates seem to be more critical to successfully keeping machines operational than Windows updates. Or so it seems.
Grant0 -
Hey Grant,
Thanks a lot, very kind of you, but I was actually joking, ackknowledging your satisfaction with your Dell. 😄
Although two months back I really have considered to replace my 5yrs Dell M4500 with a used newer one like yours I am now looking for a brandnew workstation or desktop.
Cheers
BeO0 -
[quote="BeO" wrote:
Hey Grant,
Thanks a lot, very kind of you, but I was actually joking, ackknowledging your satisfaction with your Dell. 😄
Although two months back I really have considered to replace my 5yrs Dell M4500 with a used newer one like yours I am now looking for a brandnew workstation or desktop.
Cheers
BeO
Hehe.
I was not trying to be serious!
However, there are cost savings to be found (possibly from all major manufacturers) with specifications that might suit us for photo editing better than they did for the requirements of whoever ordered the configuration in the first place.
Good luck with your specification exercise.
Grant0 -
HansB wrote
"CO-9.0.2 runs really fine on my MBPr mid2014/2.8GHz/16GB RAM/1TB SSD (sometimes with a Wacom Intuos 4 attached). It usually eats up about 4GB RAM when working on 18MP Canon cr2 files. It takes less than 5 minutes to export 100 images to 16bit tiff, with only 10% load on CPU cores. OpenCL does it's job. Tethering works, too, including Capture Pilot app."
How fast is your video card? Upgrading the RAM to 16GB is no problem, but upgrading to a 2GB NVIDIA video card (as Phase One recommends) on i.e. a MacBook Pro might not be possible.0 -
I thought I'd chime in as I'm probably using one of the oldest computers of anyone I've seen in this thread, and while I would in no way describe C1 as fast (ESPECIALLY when keywords and smart folders come into play, or when talking about catalog loading) when compared to Aperture, I wouldn't describe it as bad either. My system is as follows:
2008 Mac Pro
8-core 2.8GHz
18GB RAM
ATI Radeon HD 5770
PCIe SSD Boot and catalog drive
Software RAID data drive
Non-Retina Display
OS X 10.10.5 Yosemite
It's a beast of a computer, but certainly no match for a modern (cough) Mac Pro or one of these impressively tricked out iMacs.
Some patterns I'm seeing that I think are worth investigating further relate to OpenCL, Retina displays, El Capitan, and possibly previews.
On my system, C1 runs like a dog with OpenCL enabled, so I turned it off. Much better. With OpenCL being deprecated in El Capitan compared to Yosemite (supposedly), disabling it is a prudent troubleshooting measure. The sheer number of pixels being pushed on a 27" iMac Retina is another factor for sure. I can understand why a Retina MacBook Pro wouldn't exhibit such performance problems because they are still a fraction of the size.
This brings me to previews. I've done some experimenting and I found no benefit to having larger preview sizes. Quickly flipping through photos would always outrun the processing engine regardless of preview size, showing a highly pixellated image if I kept going through the photos quickly. Slowing down they become moderately pixellated and then snap to full resolution within about a second. When editing and moving slowly from image to image it's plenty responsive. I wouldn't call editing super smooth, but it's fine. Again, I've seen no real benefit to larger preview sizes in any of this.
There's definite overhead in maintaining large previews in the catalog though. They take a lot longer to process, and they can take up nearly as much space as the master image files. This is a problem if you have limited SSD space for the catalog. Plus when you approach the 5K pixel size, the preview requires a decent amount of resources to display all by itself, adding yet more overhead to navigation and display processing.
I set my preview size to 640 and actually feel like performance is improved, plus I have the benefit it much smaller catalogs. Granted this could be a result of my computer's lackluster performance characteristics compared to more modern ones, but I think it's something worth trying out. Just consider the fact that I don't find C1 to be at all unusable, even if a far cry from Aperture's performance, with an 8 year old computer and catalogs that have 30,000+ Nikon D7000 RAW files (I recently got a D750 and in playing with it a little bit see no real difference other than additional export time).
I'm thinking of installing C1 on my Dell at work to see how things compare. It's a brand new Precision T1700 4-core 3.5GHz (3.9GHz turbo) Xeon with 16GB RAM a Nvidia Quadro K620 and an internal SSD boot drive with Windows 7. That could be an interesting experiment.0 -
[quote="jjakucyk" wrote:
There's definite overhead in maintaining large previews in the catalog though. They take a lot longer to process, and they can take up nearly as much space as the master image files. This is a problem if you have limited SSD space for the catalog. Plus when you approach the 5K pixel size, the preview requires a decent amount of resources to display all by itself, adding yet more overhead to navigation and display processing.
I strongly recommend settings the preview size to the size of the Viewer (or to the size of the screen as a maximum). If the previews are smaller than the Viewer, they will will have to be recaulculated each time the image is viewed. While you might not have big issues with a D7000, high mp shooters will feel quite a difference, especially if they are using high resolution screens. We are talking seconds instead of miliseconds.0 -
Nothing new to add, but thought I'd add my voice to those who are getting lousy performance. I have a fully spec'd late 2015 iMac - 32gb ram, upgraded video card and store my working sessions on the internal hdd. When scrolling through images, (Nikon D750) seemingly at random one will take 2- 3 seconds to render. Weirdly, if I skip ahead to the next one and come back, it loads much quicker, maybe it's still processing that file even after I've moved on? FWIW, I have OpenCL enabled, running the latest version of C1 and El Capitan. I only switched to C1 when I bought this iMac, having previously used LR. Though I much prefer the rendering I get with C1, the performance stinks compared to LR and that's not exactly known for it's speed. I don't use any of the local adjustment tools in C1, instead doing all my work in PS, but I can imagine it being a nightmare judging by how the rest of the program performs. 0 -
[quote="NN635763134542939057UL" wrote:
Nothing new to add, but thought I'd add my voice to those who are getting lousy performance. I have a fully spec'd late 2015 iMac - 32gb ram, upgraded video card and store my working sessions on the internal hdd. When scrolling through images, (Nikon D750) seemingly at random one will take 2- 3 seconds to render. Weirdly, if I skip ahead to the next one and come back, it loads much quicker, maybe it's still processing that file even after I've moved on? FWIW, I have OpenCL enabled, running the latest version of C1 and El Capitan. I only switched to C1 when I bought this iMac, having previously used LR. Though I much prefer the rendering I get with C1, the performance stinks compared to LR and that's not exactly known for it's speed. I don't use any of the local adjustment tools in C1, instead doing all my work in PS, but I can imagine it being a nightmare judging by how the rest of the program performs.
Gidday
Suggestion: go into preferences and opt out of OpenCL. Performance of C1 is still poor, but improved on what it was.
On the positive side: I occasionally waste time looking back at some of my earlier images and when I run them through C1, they improve dramatically compared with LR. I'm hanging in there - for a bit longer.
Regards0 -
Anyone tried Capture One 9.1 on a Retina iMac ? If so are there any improvements on speed and responsiveness or is it still sluggish and slow ? 0 -
OpenCL problem is still there but otherwise things are OK/better. 0 -
[quote="fatihayoglu" wrote:
OpenCL problem is there but otherwise things are OK/better.
I have now had the time to test Capture One 9.1 on my retina iMac. And OpenCL is surely not working, but I would agree that things seem to be a bit better now but still not good enough in my opinion since Lightroom is still a lot faster on the same machine...0 -
[quote="siggibg" wrote:
And OpenCL is surely not working[quote="fatihayoglu" wrote:
OpenCL problem is there
Please contact with these issues, if you haven't done so already.0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
96 comments