It isn't photoshop related.
It's all detailed in the link : https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1079446
You can Google and see this is a problem others, even M$ knows about.
I'm guessing it could be codec related, but it only happens when using the "file exploder".
Q-Dir does not exhibit this problem.
Google found a really good write up on Model Mayhem about this bug, I don't remember the link.
I was going to make a login, just to participate in that discussion, never did, as I have moved on.
buggz2k wrote:
It isn't photoshop related.
It's all detailed in the link : https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1079446
You can Google and see this is a problem others, even M$ knows about.
I'm guessing it could be codec related, but it only happens when using the "file exploder".
Q-Dir does not exhibit this problem.
Google found a really good write up on Model Mayhem about this bug, I don't remember the link.
I was going to make a login, just to participate in that discussion, never did, as I have moved on.
I didn't get much info out of Google--except for some of your own other posts. I'm still not even sure what "file exploder" is.
How well were you working with multi-gigabyte files in 64-bit XP?
I would not expect to be able to do much productive with such large files in only 8 gigs of ram anyway.
I believe M$ = Microsoft and "file exploder" is Windows Explorer. It's been a while since i've seen these terms used and they'd often be accompanied by terms like 'windoze'.
Back to the issue. I haven't personally seen 100% memory utilization when opening a folder with lots of tiff files or even a handful of large tiff files. Perhaps I'll have to do a little experimenting this evening. There appears to be a couple of 'work arounds' to avoid the issue (more often than not).
Well if it is accompanied by a term like "windoze" the post is likely by a malcontent Linux user who hates "Windows" anyway. I ignore posts from these immature wieners at all cost.
Using CS5 to stitch 717 images. It responded slower than I thought it would at first and accidentally directed it to stitch all 717 images. I shot the scene with my 50mm 1.8 a total of 239 times AEB at +/- 1 stop which equals 717. It processed the first 400-ish images at about 4 seconds each then slowed down to about 40 seconds each and has been running like this ever since. I thought it was eating up the memory on my computer, but then why can I still use LR3 and internet at normal speeds?
BTW-The windows task manager currently says physical memory: 88%, CPU Usage is low...lingering around 1-4% and CS5 has a window in the lower left corner indicating Doc: 46.8M/29.0G but not sure what that means. 47Mb layer with a total of 29 gigs between the 600+ images it has processed thus far to be stitched?
I am not sure what your issue has to do with 64-bit systems...
but the 46.8M/29.0G means the file you're working with is 46.8MB... however due to all of the stitching and processing the document in Photoshop is using 29Gigs of memory to process. In PS you can tell the program how much of your computer memory it can use. If the program needs to use more memory than you have 'allocated' then it will begin to use your hard drive as 'memory' which btw is much much slower than your ram. This is why the processing has slowed to a crawl.
If you are needing to stitch many files you may also consider down sizing the image dimensions first to keep the memory load managable.
plubbry wrote:
I am not sure what your issue has to do with 64-bit systems...
but the 46.8M/29.0G means the file you're working with is 46.8MB... however due to all of the stitching and processing the document in Photoshop is using 29Gigs of memory to process. In PS you can tell the program how much of your computer memory it can use. If the program needs to use more memory than you have 'allocated' then it will begin to use your hard drive as 'memory' which btw is much much slower than your ram. This is why the processing has slowed to a crawl.
If you are needing to stitch many files you may also consider down sizing the image dimensions first to keep the memory load managable....Show more →
I was wondering if what I was experiencing was an issue with a 64-bit system. My apologies if my post didn't fit here, but thank you for the info and tips. 10 hours later it still hasn't completed the process. I aborted and am now re-sizing and will attempt again. Thank you.
