Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: DxO Quirks  (Read 4550 times)
RFPhotography
Guest
« on: December 07, 2010, 07:40:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been provided a copy of DxO Pro (v6.5) for evaluation and to say I'm experiencing some difficulty would be an understatement.

It has yet to complete processing a single image.  The progress bar gets to about 75% and just stops.  The timer continues to tick away but the image processing doesn't finish, even after several minutes.  I've tried a few different images with different adjustments and no luck.  Actually, as I type this, it's just finished the first image in 4:01.  I guess I was being a bit impatient after 2:30 or so in stopping processing.

Speed is also another issue.  The program gives an indicated processing time.  For me, it's indicating 1:20, 1:30 or more per image.  I'm not on the fastest computer in the world, 2.0GHz dual core with 4GB of RAM on Win7 64.  As noted above, even those times seem to be a pipe dream.

Is slowness a common issue with DxO?  If so, how does anyone use it? 
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2391


« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2010, 08:40:04 AM »
ReplyReply

I down loaded the trial copy and processed a couple of images. Process time was as advertised. My Computer specs >
Intel(R)Core(TM) i7CPU 860 @  2.8GHz Memory 8GB Windows 7 64 bit.
Logged

FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 323


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2010, 10:23:01 AM »
ReplyReply

If you process one image at a time it could be very annoying as you experienced.

It work best when you prepare a lot of images and process them in batch.

Note that during batch process it will probably use all the resources of your computer. I usually start a batch just before going to sleep.

Logged

RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2010, 11:28:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks to you both.  So it is, basically, slow.  Fair enough.
Logged
Mike Raub
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2010, 04:38:29 PM »
ReplyReply

I had the same problem with an earlier version of DXO and found the problem was that I had not properly specified an output path--DXO did not know where to put the processed file. DXO is slow (even on an i7 iMac with 8 GB of RAM) but quality is the best I've seen from any RAW converter.


I've been provided a copy of DxO Pro (v6.5) for evaluation and to say I'm experiencing some difficulty would be an understatement.

It has yet to complete processing a single image.  The progress bar gets to about 75% and just stops.  The timer continues to tick away but the image processing doesn't finish, even after several minutes.  I've tried a few different images with different adjustments and no luck.  Actually, as I type this, it's just finished the first image in 4:01.  I guess I was being a bit impatient after 2:30 or so in stopping processing.

Speed is also another issue.  The program gives an indicated processing time.  For me, it's indicating 1:20, 1:30 or more per image.  I'm not on the fastest computer in the world, 2.0GHz dual core with 4GB of RAM on Win7 64.  As noted above, even those times seem to be a pipe dream.

Is slowness a common issue with DxO?  If so, how does anyone use it? 
Logged
jamesn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2010, 08:21:18 AM »
ReplyReply

I noticed when I installed the update to 6.5 on my Mac Pro, the average time per image to process went up from about 15 seconds to about 22 seconds.  Of course, DXO is currently doing an even better job of rendering the RAW images from my Canon 20D.  The end result looks better (especially in the background in pictures that include shadow detail- there's a great deal less of the "threadbare rug" effect and the areas that have little or no illumination or detail present).

I have 7 GB of RAM installed and my Mac Pro is the original model from 2006 so it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the newer ones.  I did some checking in the DXO Preference window and found that the new version of the software had GPU Acceleration checked but that the Batch processing power slider was set to the middle between Minimum and Maximum.  I slid it over to "Maximum" and when I processed a batch of 76 images that I took yesterday it began to serve up the finished jpg images at a rate of 4 at a time (I have 4 cores on the Mac Pro) instead of 2 at a time which I had been getting ever since upgrading to version 6 (I hadn't bothered to change or even check on the performance settings since I had always averaged about 15 seconds per photo I didn't worry too much about going from 2 at a time to 4 at a time.  Checking the Activity Monitor I could see a lot of activity in the 4 cores regardless of whether it is turning out 2 or 4 finished jpegs at a time).

Anyway, the 6.5 was slower than before in output with the slider still set between the extremes- but when I re-set it to "maximum"
the 76 jpegs were produced in a total of 1247 seconds - an overall average of 16.41 seconds per jpeg but since is was producing 4 per cycle the actual processing time for each RAW file to Jpeg was just over 65 seconds.

DXO does such a spectacular job for me that I wouldn't care if it took 5 minutes per file.  With batch processing I can just set running and forget about it till it's done.  Any last minute touchups can be done in Aperture where I can pump up the brightness, sharpness etc. and get rid of blemishes and almost never have the need to open my copy of Photoshop CS3 which is always a pain to use.

You didn't mention the size of your RAW files.  My old 20D is only 8 megapixels and puts out 7 to 8 MB RAW files.  If you have a new camera with much larger RAW files I'm sure that you could expect the processing time to increase.

pictures from our recent snowstorm in the Twin Cities, these were all taken with my Canon 20D, a Canon 17-40L lens, and a polarizer
processed as 90% jpegs (the default that DXO chooses initially) and the jpegs were tweaked in Aperture 3.1 (almost entirely consisting of the use of the "Straighten" box to get the pictures level:

http://picasaweb.google.com/jamesn88888/TheGreatSnowfallOfDecember11#
« Last Edit: December 17, 2010, 07:50:41 AM by jamesn » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad