Jump to content
Gasman

Raw`s still slow to load!!

Recommended Posts

It certainly spikes all of my CPUs (i7) but since loading a RAW file is a blink in other software, my guess is that Affinity is doing "too much" analysis and set up during load.

 

After watching Affinity memory usage during a RAW load, it's impressive that Affinity goes from using 500 MB to using 2.5 GB of RAM to load a single file! And a second file sends it up to 4.5 GB.  Thus 2 GB per image!  Good thing I have 32 GB of fast RAM!

 

Irfanview goes from 2 MB to 114 MB.  Trivial memory usage!  Perhaps Irfanview is only loading the JPG preview not the full RAW file?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Asser82, do you feel then that the critical part of a machine spec would be the number of cores available rather than whether it's an i5 or i7 ?

Looking at MEBs topic on performance I was kind of getting that feeling. Or is it primarily how the data model is getting built ?

 

If it's the first at least I can factor that in to my buying decisions if it's the second then may as well hold tight and see how thing progress!

 

Regards

It looks like all cores get a job to do. But it is difficult to tell, whether a 8/16 core ryzen would lead to a further improvement. It is often not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is true then the JPG preview image is a nice full resolution excellent quality image.

I have once read a book which covered some adobe lightroom interna. I mean in the library module they start with the embedded jpeg preview if you do not trigger raw based preview generation while importing the photos into the catalog. The user gets the preview immediatly so that he sees something. When he starts the development of a raw the raw data is read and the development process is applied to get a raw data based preview, if this not happened on import. So in the worst case the new image might look completely different to the embedded preview. But normally it is not the case. Next there are different previews for different zoom levels. Standard previews with approximatly the size of the screen which are used for overview zoom levels and 1:1 previews for 100% and above. After raw data based previews are generated, they are stored in a central preview cache with early stage development data. So next time the raw is opened the raw data based previews are generated with the help of the cache which shortens the process.

 

The important part is, that you always see a preview. And it is not a good situation when you need more than 1 or 2 seconds to see the first preview, even if it is not that accurate. My feeling is, that the Affinity preview generation process is not that well stuctured and that there is no preview cache available. Thats why we have to wait so long every time we open the same raw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really geeky, and incredibly interesting :)

I'd love for the Devs to comment but obviously and correctly they can't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I'd assume that Affinity is not displaying any preview.  They are completely getting the image ready for post processing as they load it.  Unfortunately that gives the user the impression the load times are horribly slow.  I loaded up the same image side by side in Affinity (no adjustments) and in Irfanview and there is a noticable visual difference which I'm sure is due to the "Develop Assistant" doing several things: "Apply lens corrections", "Apply color reduction" (noise) and applying the tone curve.  Perhaps if they didn't apply those during loading we'd have a far more responsive app.  Then they could give us a button to easily apply those if we desired them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^ I followed up on my thought.  With those Develop Assistant options set to "take no action" the load time was twice as fast (half the time)!  Someone might want to independently test my results I also turned "retina" rendering to lowest quality (fastest).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loaded up the same image side by side in Affinity (no adjustments) and in Irfanview and there is a noticable visual difference

 

Irfianview only opens the preview though - it doesn't have to deal with demosaicing the Raw file, applying preset curves, colour profiles, NR and other default adjustments that a Raw converter needs to go through before presenting the image for work.


Keith Reeder

 

(I don't need bird photography lessons - OK..?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now performed further measurements on my PC:

 

1 core: 11 sec

2 cores: 9 sec

3 cores: 7 sec

4 cores: 6,5 sec

5 cores: 6 sec

6 cores: 6 sec

7 cores: 5,5 sec

8 cores: 5 sec

8 cores + take no action in assistent: 4 sec

 

So most improvements happen on the first 4 cores. The retina setting did not have any speed effect here.

 

But even on one core this PC is twice as fast, as my old one with 4 cores. Maybe it is not only the CPU, but also the much better graphic card with fast VRAM.

 

Old: Phenom II X4 2,8 GHz + 16GB 1333 Mhz DDR3 Ram + Radeon HD 5770 1GB Graphics

New: Core i7 7700k 4,5 GHz + 16GB 3200 MHz DDR4 Ram + NVidia GTX 1070 8GB Graphics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now performed further measurements on my PC:

 

1 core: 11 sec

2 cores: 9 sec

3 cores: 7 sec

4 cores: 6,5 sec

5 cores: 6 sec

6 cores: 6 sec

7 cores: 5,5 sec

8 cores: 5 sec

8 cores + take no action in assistent: 4 sec

 

So most improvements happen on the first 4 cores. The retina setting did not have any speed effect here.

 

But even on one core this PC is twice as fast, as my old one with 4 cores. Maybe it is not only the CPU, but also the much better graphic card with fast VRAM.

 

Old: Phenom II X4 2,8 GHz + 16GB 1333 Mhz DDR3 Ram + Radeon HD 5770 1GB Graphics

New: Core i7 7700k 4,5 GHz + 16GB 3200 MHz DDR4 Ram + NVidia GTX 1070 8GB Graphics

I'd expect that since image editors usually prefer phisical cores rather than logical like in you 7700k, and they do usually like core clock over sheer number of cores, but I digress, Quick question, how are you finding your experience with the new machine, I got AP lately after having tried the beta last year and it feels, well...sluggish at best, And I'm running a core i/ 3.2Ghz, 16 gb ram, gt 845M (yes I'm stuck with my laptop for now)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.