C6 is Slow. Should I delete old version?
C6 is my current but I still have "Pro" in my C drive.
Release notes recommend to get rid of "Pro."
I had a bad experience in the past.
When I got 5 and deleted 4, then 5 disappeared too.
I assumed they were linked, and 5 was attached to 4.
So now I am afraid to delete "Pro." I don't want to lose 6.
But 6 runs slow as molasses and I am hunting for reasons.
thank you for your kind help!!
carol dwyer
Release notes recommend to get rid of "Pro."
I had a bad experience in the past.
When I got 5 and deleted 4, then 5 disappeared too.
I assumed they were linked, and 5 was attached to 4.
So now I am afraid to delete "Pro." I don't want to lose 6.
But 6 runs slow as molasses and I am hunting for reasons.
thank you for your kind help!!
carol dwyer
0
-
Key here is missing information: version of Windows (my guess: Windows XP, 32-bit) and hardware spec (proc, RAM).
I do not know which version your "Pro" is, but on Windows you can have Capture One version from 3 up to 6 installed next to each other and use each at will. However, that said, I strongly recommend NOT to do that then for testing only. The more you have a 'clean and lean machine', the better. The fact that you described that CO 4 and 5 were linked, means to me that your Windows system is not in the best state of health. They are not linked as far as I have experienced.
Another issue that might be playing a role here is that CO6 from 6.3.x really needs more RAM and preferably a 64-bit Windows version (and 64-bit version of CO6). Maybe your system runs better with CO 6.2.2.
My suggested steps are to deactivate and uninstall any version of CO on your system. This includes support files, batch history, default session file and so on. More detailed instructions can be found in KB article 1158
http://www.phaseone.com/en/search/artic ... nguageid=1
Perhaps also defragment your HDD and clean up your system as well (remove old files and programs). Next, install 6.2.2 (download from Phase One software archive) and see whether that runs fine. If it does, consider updating to that latest version or leave it as is (all depends on your hardware, which I have no knowledge about now).
General practice regarding updating and upgrading on Windows: always remove/uninstall the previous version through Control Panel before installing the new version.0 -
Paul, thank you so much!!
Windows XP 32 bit
2.8 gig processor
2 gb ram
I did defrag C drive in safe mode 4 weeks ago, and clean it up regularly.
My Pro version is 3.7.9.
next to V6.2
I admit that my XP, from 2003 is getting creaky. I dread changing it.
If I do, I would prefer Mac and that will involve new hardware and programs.
So scary. Wish to put it off a year or more.
My V6.2 is so slow I am ready to jump off a cliff and won't be able to stall a year unless I can get the V6.2 moving faster.
I did not like V 4 and 5 so I stayed with 3.7.9 until 6 came out.
That's why I still have the 3.7.9 Pro. I prefer that over the complex 6 but I have
a Mark II files now so was forced to upgrade.
Won't I lose one "download" if I delete V6 and take it again?
I am reading article 1158 now. thank you so much!0 -
The RAM requirements for CO6 changed from 2 GB (up to 6.2.2) to 4 GB (6.3.0 and later). This is why you will probably be much happier with 6.2.2.
Uninstalling your current CO 6.x setup and installing another CO 6 version would not affect the current activation. However, to be on the safe side, you can deactivate it first from within the program and activate it again after finishing the new installation. See also the new sticky thread in this forum on activation for more information.
In case you ever go Mac (congrats upfront <grin>), you can safely use your CO license. Other software has to be bought new or you can buy a cross-platform upgrade (Photoshop).0 -
[quote="Paul_E" wrote:
The RAM requirements for CO6 changed from 2 GB (up to 6.2.2) to 4 GB (6.3.0 and later). This is why you will probably be much happier with 6.2.2.
Perhaps, but the 6.2.x versions were the most unstable on my 32-bit WinXP system - so unstable I reverted to 5.x. Certain functions simply crashed CO. 6.3.x fixed those so it is more stable, but it will still crash with 'out of memory' errors unless I carefully watch memory usage.
Bottom line is I can use 6.3.x on my system, but not 6.2.20 -
I have been using 6.3.0 for a while mostly problem free. (winxp 32-bit standard edition)
I just did a clean install of 6.3.3 (including deleting all .cop and .cof files) per PO knowledge base article.
Directory structure of image is unchanged.
Now 6.3.3 is frequently crashing. Logs look like some error in reading proxies?
Did memory requirements change from 6.3 to 6.3.3?
Just FYI, if I wanted support I'd open an case.0 -
I had similar problems a few months ago - Windows XP32 machine, 2GB RAM. It was so bad that I did not even touch photos I brought from vacation. So I decided to upgrade my PC - i7-2600k, 8GB RAM, 120GB SSD, Windows 7 (64). Now everything flies! No more problems.
I would advise you seriously look at upgrading your computer, or at lest add more RAM.0 -
Krzysztof 23, you have the answer.
there is no way around it, if you want to play with the big boys.
thank you for taking the time to post.
Now I have to decide - PC or Mac.
This will be my last great computer. I'm 63 & recently retired.
I did shoot 4 sessions a day for 20 years.
Now I travel fulltime in an RV and shoot scenic.
Take care.0 -
C1 really needs a good hardware in order to perform well. If you have a chance to buy a graphic card please ensure that it will be compatible to C1 Open CL. Using a fast CPU, 8GB+ RAM and a compatible graphic card you will have lots of fun working with C1.
I have recently bought a new machine, containing:
- i7 2700k
- 16GB RAM
- Sparkle GTS 450 with DDR5 graphic-RAM
Since I bought this configuration the application runs very fast and wihout any problems.
Kind regards,
Joerg0 -
[quote="carol ann" wrote:
...
Now I have to decide - PC or Mac.
This will be my last great computer. I'm 63 & recently retired.
I did shoot 4 sessions a day for 20 years.
Now I travel fulltime in an RV and shoot scenic.
Take care.
Hi Carol: I would like to do the same (traveling fulltime) while retiring 😉 Well, just getting retired will make me happy...
I would advice you to get a mac. It´s preety similar to Windows, but more reliable.
That´s how it worked for me as I was a windows user for several years.
I know this is the windows forum 🤭 , and I don´t want to start an endless argue, but CO is more stable in Mac.
I can handle a session with 1000 pics (splited in 8 folders) and process pretty fast the files of my P65. And the Macbook that I use is the 13' i5 4Gb wich is only 1000 usd, with an upgrade made on my own to 8Gb. And I didn´t have to worry about the graphic card, as all of them worked.
Just my experience...
Saludos0 -
carol ann,
great I could help.
Nac v. PC - I do not know. I have always used PC and never had problems. I do admire Apple though.
Enjoy your retirement. If I may ask where do you travel inyour RV?0 -
I just installed captured one 6.33 64bit on my window 7 pc. This software runs slower than Photoshop CS5 64bit.
Why is it running slow?0 -
[quote="NNN634613073432758670" wrote:
I just installed captured one 6.33 64bit on my window 7 pc. This software runs slower than Photoshop CS5 64bit.
Why is it running slow?
You might provide more details both about your setup (RAM, raw files) and actions that run slow.0 -
I have CO 6.3.3 (64) and CS5 (64). I do not see any difference in speed. Yes, the CS5 starts faster but I think it is because CO checks for updates etc. The CS5 starts under 4 seconds. But I do have a new SATA3 256GB SSD. And it does make a hudge difference on strat ups. However, during "normal" operations (editing) both software are very fast. I do not have to wait for anything. 0 -
I too have found CP1PRO6 really slow and have put up with it for a year now 😲( I run a windows 7 64bit with 8gb of ram with a compatable graphics card.
What is frustrating is the the 'express' version of capture one was alot quicker, but I need the fumctions of the pro version.
The thing which is slow is the images rendering when you click a new thumbnail I am finding it is taking 5secs per image to render nice and sharp to evaluate the image. There is no change even when the proxies ( whatever they are 😕 )are processed. What I notice in the software is once a new image is selected the little wheel at the top left of the image is spining its labeled 'focusing viewer' when that dissapears the image is displayed nice and sharp. It also makes no differance whether its a folder of 20 images or 700.
All other Raw viewing software on my computer works fine including Adobe Bridge and I currently use Photo Mechanic ( which is lighting quick for viewing and selecting ) to select raw images from my 5d mk2.
If I bang my head against my desk anymore I'am going to break my desk - can anybody shed any light onto this problem?
( I have unistalled and reinstalled a few times too )
Thanks for your help 😊0 -
I have seen the same exact thing, drives me nuts and is still why I am using v5. I have put in a support case, even sent them a video showing them what I was talking about. The last I heard (This case has been going on for over a year) was the tech understood that there might be some tweaking that needed to be done for the few milliseconds of delay seen. Apparently Phase one thinks this delay is not a problem.
I also notice the second time you click on the image there is not that 5 second delay, this tells me they have something screwed up in the proxy creation. Seems like something isn't getting done during the proxy creation that is getting done the first time you click on a thumbnail.0 -
I suggest Phase One do take this seriously or they are going to lose a whole load of users! Dan do you find version 5 is ok? 0 -
Just to put actual figures on this an average wedding we will normally take 1600 pictures - so compared to Photo Mechanic it will take 133 extra minutes to evaluate the images into keepers and rejects. When we come down to the raw edit we are looking at around 700 images, so its an extra hour just waiting for the images to render ( plus the normal editing time and processing which is fine in CP1pro6 ). We also run a high st studio so the amount of images we are dealing with runs in 1000's per week - those extra 5 secs per image really add up!
I will be at Focus in March and will be looking at switching if this problem is not resolved.0 -
Yes, v5 does not have this delay. It does not have all of the new features of 6 but those extra 5 seconds kill me. Last week I shot and processed about 15,000 images. Could not imaging doing it in 6. 0 -
Hmmm.
Did you try opening them first in V5, sort, toss, rate, etc. This should also create some proxies. Then open up v6 and process. It might be faster.
Jim0 -
[quote="dan122" wrote:
Yes, v5 does not have this delay. It does not have all of the new features of 6 but those extra 5 seconds kill me. Last week I shot and processed about 15,000 images. Could not imaging doing it in 6.
From what I recall of V5 trials the delay when re-rendering on size change or from inmitial RAW render did exist and was about the same as V6. V6 can seem to take longer to somplted is there are multiple layers - some layer types are more prone to taking a while than other.
My system is no computing hotrod but 5 secs for full render at 100% still seems to be about the mark.
I get a very similar result with another similar application use that seems to have a parallel philosophy for processing.
When I used LR (V1.4) quite a lot if seemed to me that the philosophy was a little different and sepped seemed faster until one noticed that speed to completion (as opposed to speed to first display) was about the same. The difference s seemed to be that Adobe chose to render in blcks and make thing happens on screen 'instantly' and others tend to do things differently with most of the result being delivered in a rush at the end.
In my case, facing similar challenges on some shoots, I suspect the only solution is a lot of processing power or a dedicated review and select application. That said I have noticed that most of the rapid display apps I have looked at so far seem to be mostly working with the embedded jpg from the RAW rather than a rendition from the RAW file data. How well this works is dependent on the screen resolution in play and the res of the embedded jpg. But whilst it may be good enough to deselect an obviously unsharp and uninteresting image it's not necessarily going to tell the full story.
That said I have not yet played with Photo Mechanic in order to be able to compare the industry standard with alternatives. I plan to do so soon, although based on watching the Zach Arias workflow video last night I'm not entirely sure what to expect.
Grant Perkins0 -
Note that Photo Mechanic has the ability to show the embedded JPEG in the raw file, which makes it very fast for browsing. This is different from applications like CO6 that always render the raw data and apply adjustments in real-time (well, almost real-time, 😉 )
Different tools, different purposes (both great tools in their kind, IMHO).0 -
Hi Paul
Thanks for your response - although Photo Mechanic works in a different way to C1P6 is this also true of the 'express' ( non pro ) version of Capture One? I ask this as before I upgraded to C1P6 I used the express version which did not experiance any of these delay problems when reviewing/editing/processing. Everything it did was faster. I upgraded as I needed alott of the Pro features but need not expect it to be so much slower on the exact same computer using files from the exact same camera.0 -
Paul,
So we can expect every version to be slower and slower? Version 5 has virtually no delay, v6 has a 5-10 second delay will v7 see a 10-20 second delay?
Also, why does the delay only happen the first time you select a photo? Any subsequent selection sees no delay. If this delay is due to all the rendering C1 has to do, why don't I see the delay every time I select the photo?
Dan0 -
[quote="carl30" wrote:
Thanks for your response - although Photo Mechanic works in a different way to C1P6 is this also true of the 'express' ( non pro ) version of Capture One?
Hi carl30,
Both CO Express and Pro 6 work in the same way. However, with CO Pro 6 you can make adjustments you can not make with Express, like with the Adjustments Layer and Keystone tools. These tools can put more strain on your computer resources. When one of these resources becomes saturated, performance may degraded noticeable.0 -
[quote="dan122" wrote:
So we can expect every version to be slower and slower? Version 5 has virtually no delay, v6 has a 5-10 second delay will v7 see a 10-20 second delay?
That we can only determine when a next version has arrived. Rest is speculation.[quote="dan122" wrote:
Also, why does the delay only happen the first time you select a photo? Any subsequent selection sees no delay. If this delay is due to all the rendering C1 has to do, why don't I see the delay every time I select the photo?
This could be due to proxy generation or - in case the proxy have been generated already - some kind of buffering in memory of the proxy.0 -
Has anyone experimented with the proxy size to see the effect on both speed and quality.
It is not easy to do a side by side comparison for quality unfortunately.0 -
The "slowness" is a double-edged sword because I feel C1PRO 6.3.3 is "slow" yet it is stable. I tried liking Lightroom, but it keeps crashing constantly when I am trying to sync settings across multiple RAW files. C1PRO barely crash once it is running. I am on Win 7 Home Premium @ 16 GB @ Core i5 750 (2009 release). 0 -
Solved! Well its running a lot faster now 😲) A friend who happens to be some pro computer wizard changed my HDD to a SSD drive - which at first did not make too much difference to C1P6 - then he suggested when working on a folder of images load them onto the same drive - and wow what a difference practically instant! At the cost of just £80 its going to pay for itself in just a couple of weeks with time saved! 0 -
[quote="Paul_E" wrote:
[quote="dan122" wrote:
So we can expect every version to be slower and slower? Version 5 has virtually no delay, v6 has a 5-10 second delay will v7 see a 10-20 second delay?
That we can only determine when a next version has arrived. Rest is speculation.[quote="dan122" wrote:
Also, why does the delay only happen the first time you select a photo? Any subsequent selection sees no delay. If this delay is due to all the rendering C1 has to do, why don't I see the delay every time I select the photo?
This could be due to proxy generation or - in case the proxy have been generated already - some kind of buffering in memory of the proxy.
If I have already generated the proxies before I start working on photos why is it generating proxies again? Some kind of buffering? Some kind of BS. If C1 has to buffer the proxy why is it only the first time I select a photo to edit and not every time I select a photo to buffer? Sorry, not buying that as an answer.0 -
[quote="dan122" wrote:
[quote="Paul_E" wrote:
[quote="dan122" wrote:
So we can expect every version to be slower and slower? Version 5 has virtually no delay, v6 has a 5-10 second delay will v7 see a 10-20 second delay?
That we can only determine when a next version has arrived. Rest is speculation.[quote="dan122" wrote:
Also, why does the delay only happen the first time you select a photo? Any subsequent selection sees no delay. If this delay is due to all the rendering C1 has to do, why don't I see the delay every time I select the photo?
This could be due to proxy generation or - in case the proxy have been generated already - some kind of buffering in memory of the proxy.
If I have already generated the proxies before I start working on photos why is it generating proxies again? Some kind of buffering? Some kind of BS. If C1 has to buffer the proxy why is it only the first time I select a photo to edit and not every time I select a photo to buffer? Sorry, not buying that as an answer.
The question of potential re-generation of proxies in advance or as they are demanded for editing is an interesting conundrum. Comparing other applications in the past, some checking and maybe regenerating proxies at load, others waiting for individual file demands, always creates interesting discussion about perceived speed (as well as 'actual' speed!)
One interesting aspect of C1 is that it seems to display everything with the current 'Output settings' in place. (I'm not sure what it does if you have more than one set as active but you always get at least one if there is an output recipe ticked.)
I have yet to check this but I assume that if no recipe is ticked or the current recipe is the same as the one that applied when the proxie was created last there will be less processing to do. Likewise the size and nature of the edit instructions will take some time longer to process for some images than others although proabably not a linear relationship.
There are probably other things that will also kick off a proxy regeneration when a folder is opened but rather than speculate about what and when it would nice to have an 'official' overview of what happens since if there are some aspects that couold be applied differently through our workflows it would be nice to know what those things are.
In the end though it may simply be that we need to consider a carefully specced system to take advantage of current and future developments for the next few years.
Grant Perkins0
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
32件のコメント