I just think it’s a pity that you will be missing out on so much. They recently gave us DeepPRIME/PureRAW and Fujifilm X-TRANS support-as far as I’m concerned, they can run the UI on Rosetta 2 for as long as Apple supports it.īut as I said, you choose to spend your money the way you want to. I would much rather see them spend these on adding features to PhotoLab than to port insignificant parts of the program to Apple Silicon. Third, DxO has limited developer resources. On my 14" MacBook Pro (M1 Max with 32 GPU cores), the average drops to under 5 seconds per image! Would I want to forego this leap in performance just because I may be forced to upgrade to a new version of PhotoLab in the next five years or so? Certainly not! No big deal, you say, but when you’re running a batch of 100 or so photos, it starts to count. How to export to Affinity Photo 2 DeepPRIME and DeepPRIME XD hardware acceleration further information. I've changed my standard preset, but DxO PhotoLab seems to ignore it. Second, you’re missing out on tons of cool stuff! I work a great deal with DeepPRIME on my quad-core iMac i7 at 4 Ghz, processing a single image (DeepPRRIME plus all edits) took an average of around 45 seconds per image. After processing my files, they seem to show distortion. Given that Intel versions of Macs can still be bought today, it is very likely that you will be able too run software that has not been fully ported to Apple Silicon for several years, not to mention that DxO and others would obviously move to update the application if Apple discontinued Rosetta 2 support. Rosetta 1 was released in 2006 with macOS Tiger and officially discontinued in 2011 with macOS Lion (thought you could still run versions of the OS for a while without upgrading to Lion). Well, you decide what to spend your money on, but I, for one, have to disagree with your approach. If you had not posted your times I probably would not have even thought about testing the trials, so thank you.I’m holding off making a purchase of DxO software until it is able to run without Rosetta. I wonder if the same is true for Gigapixel. So the problem all along has been that the older Sharpen AI app was just too slow and they have improved that. Times for Focus, Motion and Softness were 0:31, 0:31 and 0:12. I then changed to Sharpen and the time decreased to 0:45. For one thing I changed the setting from Enable discrete GPU ON to OFF, and the Stablize time decreased to 1:45. I forgot to mention that the Sharpen AI setting was for Stabilize, not Sharpen or Focus. Sharpen, on the other hand, is something I would use more frequently if it did not take so long to process. I don’t generally enlarge photos, so the fact that Gigapixel takes “forever” to process my images on my machine is not a real issue for me. Newer versions might be considerably faster and if your testing was using newer versions I could download the trials and see how they run. Gigapixel is the 2020 version, 5.1.7, and Sharpen is 2.1.8. The first was done using Gigapixel as an external editor for PhotoLine and the second used Gigapixel as a stand-alone app. a 16MP jpg from my wife’s Nikon point-and-shoot took a bit more than 4 1/2 minutes for the same 2x upscale. I assumed it might be faster on a smaller jpg I also timed it as well. For fast and fluid file management, DxO PhotoLab 6 has you covered. Gigapixel, on a 20MB 16 bit tiff, took just short of 6 minutes with the default settings and the upscale set to 2x. I tested it on the Gigapixel output and that took almost 5 minutes. Sharpen, on a 20MP 16bit tiff, took about 3 1/2 minutes, so my “guess” of about 1 minute was pretty far off, and not in a good way. My first set of figures was just guessing from the work that I had done, so I decided to actually time both Sharpen and Gigapixel. I am not sure where you are getting your GPAI figures from
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |