Preparing new batch job takes extremely long

[CJP001]

When setting up a batch job, the step of adding the source files takes a really long time, maybe close to an hour.  Th files I'm working with are a few hundred MB each and I'm adding a couple hundred files at a time.  My computer is fairly fast,  32GB memory, SSD, Win 10.  Affinity Photo 2.4.0.

I think what is happening is that it is reading each file to generate a thumbnail before I click OK.  Once I click OK and it starts processing, it takes an expectedly long time to process.

Is there a way to skip whatever reading is happening at the time the files are added to the source queue?

Chris

 

[walt.farrell]

10 hours ago, CJP001 said:

Is there a way to skip whatever reading is happening at the time the files are added to the source queue?

No.

I'm not sure what kind of verification/validation it does during that stage.

[David in Яuislip]

12 hours ago, CJP001 said:

When setting up a batch job, the step of adding the source files takes a really long time, maybe close to an hour.

If I had to wait an hour for the OK button to appear I'd look for another approach. Unless you are applying some special effects via macros I cannot think of anything that could not be achieved with imagemagick without that ridiculous wait, apart from converting to .afphoto files of course. What exactly does your batch job do?

[CJP001]

David, all the batch job does is change the width and height to 20% of their values (hx.2 and wx.2) and then set the DPI (in this case to 120 since the original DPI was 600).

I chose Affinity Photo because I'm working with JPGs that are around 50,000 pixels in one dimension or the other.  ACDSee can read larger files, but taps out at 16,000 pixels and my old version of Photoshop (CS5) can't do much better.

Are there any other solutions out there that can do:

• Very large JPGs
• Rotate and straighten
• Resize based on percentage
• Batch process the above
• Light repair work like infill, clone tool
• Perpetual license

Thank you,

Chris

[thomaso]

2 hours ago, CJP001 said:

Are there any other solutions out there

In the early 90's I used "Debabelizer" to batch scale + create colour palettes of image folders for storage & shipping on 1.4MB floppy disks (before Internet / ISDN). Back then, I loved its flexibility, intuitive interface and speed on a Macintosh IIcx with 4 MB (!) RAM and 40 MB HD.

2011 archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20111023192525/http://www.equilibrium.com/debabelizer/

Your question reminded me of this app, unfortunately the website appears rather confusing nowadays. Nevertheless, it might be worth a try if you need to use batch processing heavily. https://equilibrium.com/debabelizer/

[Andy Somerfield]

This is likely to be an unfortunate side effect of the thumbnail generation - typically thumbnails can be generated a few milliseconds, but if your files are a few hundred MB each, we might be taking a long time to generate each one.

The thumbnails serve no purpose other than to give a rough confirmation that you have chosen the file you intended to - I'd be happy to add a setting to disable them.

A

[David in Яuislip]

18 hours ago, CJP001 said:

all the batch job does is change the width and height to 20% of their values (hx.2 and wx.2) and then set the DPI (in this case to 120

I have just spent some time playing with 11 files, 65500 on the long side x about 43000 on the other, various sizes from 56MB to 110
I cannot get imagemagick to process them in a batch, it chokes on the 4th file and gets <ctrl>C and a bad word
Photo took 40s for the OK to appear then 4m 47s to process = 29.7s each
Irfanview took 2m 21s = 12.8s each or
2m 34s including sharpen and set dpi to 120 = 14s each

I think we have a winner but it's only for windows

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, David in Яuislip said:

I think we have a winner but it's only for windows

You might give XnViewMP (and/or XnConvert) a try.

[CJP001]

8 hours ago, Andy Somerfield said:

This is likely to be an unfortunate side effect of the thumbnail generation - typically thumbnails can be generated a few milliseconds, but if your files are a few hundred MB each, we might be taking a long time to generate each one.

The thumbnails serve no purpose other than to give a rough confirmation that you have chosen the file you intended to - I'd be happy to add a setting to disable them.

A

Andy, I'd be thrilled if you would add that!  It would speed things up so much!  Thank you!

[CJP001]

8 hours ago, David in Яuislip said:

I have just spent some time playing with 11 files, 65500 on the long side x about 43000 on the other, various sizes from 56MB to 110
I cannot get imagemagick to process them in a batch, it chokes on the 4th file and gets <ctrl>C and a bad word
Photo took 40s for the OK to appear then 4m 47s to process = 29.7s each
Irfanview took 2m 21s = 12.8s each or
2m 34s including sharpen and set dpi to 120 = 14s each

I think we have a winner but it's only for windows

Thanks for testing those, David!  I'll take a look at IrfanView.