Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Smartblend speed

Expand Messages
  • LoveFilm
    Can any one recount their rendering experiences using Smartblend? It gives great results but the processing time on my PC is outrageous. Is this normal? 31
    Message 1 of 14 , Jul 31, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Can any one recount their rendering experiences using Smartblend?

      It gives great results but the processing time on my PC is outrageous.
      Is this normal?

      31 image pano (three images in the sky intentionally left out)

      8777 x 3072

      Processing 12 images per row.

      Smartblend reports a 5 hour + processing time to render just the first
      12 images! And about 18hrs to render all of them at once.

      I'm on a Dell laptop - 1.6 mhz, 500mg ram. There is about 3.5 gig
      availbale on my boot drive.

      I know this is not an optimal system for this type of work. Does
      anyone know what kind of realistic speed improvements I might expect
      with a higher end configuration?

      Also - I think I saw some posts regarding this somewhere. Is there
      any equivalent to Samrtblend for the Mac?
    • Ian Wood
      ... FAR far far too little RAM and HD space available. Remember that each of the remapped images will be 80MB in RAM, and that blending 12 at once might
      Message 2 of 14 , Jul 31, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        On 1 Aug 2006, at 00:11, LoveFilm wrote:

        > 31 image pano (three images in the sky intentionally left out)
        >
        > 8777 x 3072
        >
        > Processing 12 images per row.
        >
        > Smartblend reports a 5 hour + processing time to render just the first
        > 12 images! And about 18hrs to render all of them at once.
        >
        > I'm on a Dell laptop - 1.6 mhz, 500mg ram. There is about 3.5 gig
        > availbale on my boot drive.

        FAR far far too little RAM and HD space available. Remember that each
        of the remapped images will be 80MB in RAM, and that blending 12 at
        once might require something like a gigabyte of RAM just for
        blending, plus a couple of hundred MB for the operating system
        itself. As there's nowhere near enough real RAM, everything will be
        constantly swapping to the HD, and it's likely to be a very slow HD
        compared to a full size 3.5" HD in a desktop.

        If you try stitching anything larger it's quite possible that all the
        remaining free space on the drive will be used up for virtual RAM and
        temporary files, causing all sorts of potential chaos and crashes.

        Smartblend doesn't exist for the Mac OS, just Enblend.

        Ian
      • Ingemar Bergmark
        ... Here s a speed comparison with my system. I have a Pentium D950, 4GB RAM, and 320GB SATA HDD (2x160GB RAID-0) For fullscreen panoramas I render a 6000x3000
        Message 3 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "LoveFilm" <lovefilm@...> wrote:
          >
          > Can any one recount their rendering experiences using Smartblend?
          >

          Here's a speed comparison with my system.
          I have a Pentium D950, 4GB RAM, and 320GB SATA HDD (2x160GB RAID-0)
          For fullscreen panoramas I render a 6000x3000 tiff with Smartblend or
          Enblend.
          Since I use a Nikkor 10.5mm with a Canon 20D, I take 8 photos (8.2Mpx)
          for a full sphere.
          Rendering these in Smartblend takes about 2 minutes.
          Rendering in Enblend takes about 3-4 minutes

          Regards,
          Ingemar Bergmark
          http://panoramas.bergmark.com
        • Hans-Dieter Teschner
          Hi, ... are these times for 8 or 16 bit images, does anyone know the relation for this difference? regards Hans-Dieter
          Message 4 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi,


            --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Ingemar Bergmark" <ingemar@...>
            wrote:

            > Since I use a Nikkor 10.5mm with a Canon 20D, I take 8 photos (8.2Mpx)
            > for a full sphere.
            > Rendering these in Smartblend takes about 2 minutes.
            > Rendering in Enblend takes about 3-4 minutes

            are these times for 8 or 16 bit images,

            does anyone know the relation for this difference?

            regards Hans-Dieter
          • Ingemar Bergmark
            ... (8.2Mpx) ... Sorry, I forgot to mention that I mostly use 8-bit images (for which the times above are for). I ve fiddled around with 16-bit images when
            Message 5 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans-Dieter Teschner" >
              > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Ingemar Bergmark" <ingemar@>
              > wrote:
              >
              > > Since I use a Nikkor 10.5mm with a Canon 20D, I take 8 photos
              (8.2Mpx)
              > > for a full sphere.
              > > Rendering these in Smartblend takes about 2 minutes.
              > > Rendering in Enblend takes about 3-4 minutes
              >
              > are these times for 8 or 16 bit images,
              >
              > does anyone know the relation for this difference?
              >
              > regards Hans-Dieter
              >


              Sorry, I forgot to mention that I mostly use 8-bit images (for which
              the times above are for).

              I've fiddled around with 16-bit images when there is a high dynamic
              range, but I create two 8-bit images instead when necessary. I make
              one bright and one dark image with my raw converter and then use
              Photoshop and masks to combine the two.
              I know it may sound a little cumbersome, but somehow I find it easier
              to get the results I want...


              / Ingemar
            • Michael Asgian
              Your hardware resources are kind of to small for what you do. Push more RAM if you can, you may have an empty slot... it will help alot, and ram is cheap
              Message 6 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Your hardware resources are kind of to small for what you do. Push more RAM if you can, you may have an empty slot... it will help alot, and ram is cheap lately.

                My problem wih smartblend are crashes... crashes my render machine from time to time... that's kind of anoying. especially when I'm running batch renderings... Dident try the latest beta yet,

                Anyone also experiences crashes? any fix?

                Mike

                LoveFilm <lovefilm@...> wrote: Can any one recount their rendering experiences using Smartblend?

                It gives great results but the processing time on my PC is outrageous.
                Is this normal?

                31 image pano (three images in the sky intentionally left out)

                8777 x 3072

                Processing 12 images per row.

                Smartblend reports a 5 hour + processing time to render just the first
                12 images! And about 18hrs to render all of them at once.

                I'm on a Dell laptop - 1.6 mhz, 500mg ram. There is about 3.5 gig
                availbale on my boot drive.

                I know this is not an optimal system for this type of work. Does
                anyone know what kind of realistic speed improvements I might expect
                with a higher end configuration?

                Also - I think I saw some posts regarding this somewhere. Is there
                any equivalent to Samrtblend for the Mac?






                ---------------------------------
                Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Manfred Kröger
                I m not really sure more RAM will improve smartblend s speed. It seems to me that in order to process large images all the blending is done on the hdd. This
                Message 7 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  I'm not really sure more RAM will improve smartblend's speed. It seems
                  to me that in order to process large images all the blending is done on
                  the hdd. This would explain why smartblend needed 14 GB on my drive
                  while the processor's and the RAM's usage was very low.

                  Manfred

                  Michael Asgian wrote:
                  >
                  > Your hardware resources are kind of to small for what you do. Push
                  > more RAM if you can, you may have an empty slot... it will help alot,
                  > and ram is cheap lately.
                  >
                  > My problem wih smartblend are crashes... crashes my render machine
                  > from time to time... that's kind of anoying. especially when I'm
                  > running batch renderings... Dident try the latest beta yet,
                  >
                  > Anyone also experiences crashes? any fix?
                  >
                  > Mike
                  >
                  > LoveFilm <lovefilm@... <mailto:lovefilm%40yahoo.com>> wrote: Can
                  > any one recount their rendering experiences using Smartblend?
                  >
                  > It gives great results but the processing time on my PC is outrageous.
                  > Is this normal?
                  >
                  > 31 image pano (three images in the sky intentionally left out)
                  >
                  > 8777 x 3072
                  >
                  > Processing 12 images per row.
                  >
                  > Smartblend reports a 5 hour + processing time to render just the first
                  > 12 images! And about 18hrs to render all of them at once.
                  >
                  > I'm on a Dell laptop - 1.6 mhz, 500mg ram. There is about 3.5 gig
                  > availbale on my boot drive.
                  >
                  > I know this is not an optimal system for this type of work. Does
                  > anyone know what kind of realistic speed improvements I might expect
                  > with a higher end configuration?
                  >
                  > Also - I think I saw some posts regarding this somewhere. Is there
                  > any equivalent to Samrtblend for the Mac?
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ---------------------------------
                  > Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great
                  > rates starting at 1¢/min.
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                • Dave 360texas.com
                  I think PTgui and Blending occurs on the Harddrive. I noticed a 1/3rd decrease in stitching/blending time when in PTgui I assigned my 80gb external hard drive
                  Message 8 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I think PTgui and Blending occurs on the Harddrive. I noticed a
                    1/3rd decrease in stitching/blending time when in PTgui I assigned
                    my 80gb external hard drive PTgui workspace.

                    I also noticed that PTgui creates TMP work files on my external HD
                    because I found 8 of them. I ask Joost if it was safe to remove
                    them. He said yes, PTgui 5.8.4 creates them but does not remove
                    them after closing the program.

                    Dave

                    --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Manfred Kröger
                    <Manfred_Kroeger@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > I'm not really sure more RAM will improve smartblend's speed. It
                    seems
                    > to me that in order to process large images all the blending is
                    done on
                    > the hdd. This would explain why smartblend needed 14 GB on my
                    drive
                    > while the processor's and the RAM's usage was very low.
                    >
                    > Manfred
                    >
                    > Michael Asgian wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Your hardware resources are kind of to small for what you do.
                    Push
                    > > more RAM if you can, you may have an empty slot... it will help
                    alot,
                    > > and ram is cheap lately.
                    > >
                    > > My problem wih smartblend are crashes... crashes my render
                    machine
                    > > from time to time... that's kind of anoying. especially when I'm
                    > > running batch renderings... Dident try the latest beta yet,
                    > >
                    > > Anyone also experiences crashes? any fix?
                    > >
                    > > Mike
                    > >
                    > > LoveFilm <lovefilm@... <mailto:lovefilm%40yahoo.com>> wrote: Can
                    > > any one recount their rendering experiences using Smartblend?
                    > >
                    > > It gives great results but the processing time on my PC is
                    outrageous.
                    > > Is this normal?
                    > >
                    > > 31 image pano (three images in the sky intentionally left out)
                    > >
                    > > 8777 x 3072
                    > >
                    > > Processing 12 images per row.
                    > >
                    > > Smartblend reports a 5 hour + processing time to render just the
                    first
                    > > 12 images! And about 18hrs to render all of them at once.
                    > >
                    > > I'm on a Dell laptop - 1.6 mhz, 500mg ram. There is about 3.5 gig
                    > > availbale on my boot drive.
                    > >
                    > > I know this is not an optimal system for this type of work. Does
                    > > anyone know what kind of realistic speed improvements I might
                    expect
                    > > with a higher end configuration?
                    > >
                    > > Also - I think I saw some posts regarding this somewhere. Is
                    there
                    > > any equivalent to Samrtblend for the Mac?
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > ---------------------------------
                    > > Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.
                    Great
                    > > rates starting at 1¢/min.
                    > >
                    > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • Fulvio Senore
                    I am still using version 1.1.7 and ram surely improves its performance. When I stitch a pano (15 Mpx images), memory usage goes up to about 1.5 GB for one or
                    Message 9 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I am still using version 1.1.7 and ram surely improves its performance.
                      When I stitch a pano (15 Mpx images), memory usage goes up to about 1.5
                      GB for one or more very short moments.
                      Now that I have 2GB of ram those are very short moments, when I had 1 GB
                      the program started swapping and those moments were eternal.

                      My opinion is that smartblend only uses the HD to read input images and
                      write the output image. Of course with large images this can take some
                      time. Then smartblend simply allocates memory from Windows when it needs
                      it: if there is not enough memory Windows will start swapping. Some time
                      ago, when I tried to modify enblend 1.x, I discovered that this is not
                      an efficient way to handle a low memory situation. Explicitly swapping
                      to temporary files from the application can be much faster. This is what
                      enblend did: I disabled it and performance dropped.

                      So having a lot of ram is very important for smartblend to run quickly:
                      I have found that it is much faster then enblend 2.x.

                      Fulvio Senore

                      Manfred Kröger ha scritto:
                      > I'm not really sure more RAM will improve smartblend's speed. It seems
                      > to me that in order to process large images all the blending is done on
                      > the hdd. This would explain why smartblend needed 14 GB on my drive
                      > while the processor's and the RAM's usage was very low.
                      >
                      > Manfred
                      >
                      > Michael Asgian wrote:
                      >
                      >> Your hardware resources are kind of to small for what you do. Push
                      >> more RAM if you can, you may have an empty slot... it will help alot,
                      >> and ram is cheap lately.
                      >>
                      >> My problem wih smartblend are crashes... crashes my render machine
                      >> from time to time... that's kind of anoying. especially when I'm
                      >> running batch renderings... Dident try the latest beta yet,
                      >>
                      >> Anyone also experiences crashes? any fix?
                      >>
                      >> Mike
                      >>
                      >> LoveFilm <lovefilm@... <mailto:lovefilm%40yahoo.com>> wrote: Can
                      >> any one recount their rendering experiences using Smartblend?
                      >>
                      >> It gives great results but the processing time on my PC is outrageous.
                      >> Is this normal?
                      >>
                      >> 31 image pano (three images in the sky intentionally left out)
                      >>
                      >> 8777 x 3072
                      >>
                      >> Processing 12 images per row.
                      >>
                      >> Smartblend reports a 5 hour + processing time to render just the first
                      >> 12 images! And about 18hrs to render all of them at once.
                      >>
                      >> I'm on a Dell laptop - 1.6 mhz, 500mg ram. There is about 3.5 gig
                      >> availbale on my boot drive.
                      >>
                      >> I know this is not an optimal system for this type of work. Does
                      >> anyone know what kind of realistic speed improvements I might expect
                      >> with a higher end configuration?
                      >>
                      >> Also - I think I saw some posts regarding this somewhere. Is there
                      >> any equivalent to Samrtblend for the Mac?
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >> ---------------------------------
                      >> Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great
                      >> rates starting at 1¢/min.
                      >>
                      >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > --
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • LoveFilm
                      ... I Networked my PC and Mac, and assigned the Mac s hard drive as an additional temporary directory. Seemed to work well as I needed access to more HD
                      Message 10 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Dave 360texas.com"
                        <texas360dave@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > I think PTgui and Blending occurs on the Harddrive. I noticed a
                        > 1/3rd decrease in stitching/blending time when in PTgui I assigned
                        > my 80gb external hard drive PTgui workspace.
                        >
                        > I also noticed that PTgui creates TMP work files on my external HD
                        > because I found 8 of them. I ask Joost if it was safe to remove
                        > them. He said yes, PTgui 5.8.4 creates them but does not remove
                        > them after closing the program.
                        >

                        I Networked my PC and Mac, and assigned the Mac's hard drive as an
                        additional temporary directory. Seemed to work well as I needed
                        access to more HD space. But would writing to the Mac's larger /
                        faster drive provide a speed benefit, especially since the rendering
                        was being done over the network?

                        I'll have to try that again.

                        Now - what about Enblend / Smartblend. Will they also use the
                        external drive (if set as the preferred directory in PTgui's
                        preferences) to write their temp files to. I know that on the Mac
                        (when using Xblend to pBlend to Enblend combo) that the files are
                        written to the boot directory (unless Enblend is started from the
                        command line, I think).
                      • Joost Nieuwenhuijse
                        ... Only the jpegs generated by the Preview button will be left on the drive; PTGui cannot delete them because the preview application may still be running.
                        Message 11 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Dave 360texas.com"
                          > <texas360dave@...> wrote:
                          >> I think PTgui and Blending occurs on the Harddrive. I noticed a
                          >> 1/3rd decrease in stitching/blending time when in PTgui I assigned
                          >> my 80gb external hard drive PTgui workspace.
                          >>
                          >> I also noticed that PTgui creates TMP work files on my external HD
                          >> because I found 8 of them. I ask Joost if it was safe to remove
                          >> them. He said yes, PTgui 5.8.4 creates them but does not remove
                          >> them after closing the program.

                          Only the jpegs generated by the Preview button will be left on the
                          drive; PTGui cannot delete them because the preview application may
                          still be running. All other temp files are cleaned up properly.

                          LoveFilm wrote:
                          > I Networked my PC and Mac, and assigned the Mac's hard drive as an
                          > additional temporary directory. Seemed to work well as I needed
                          > access to more HD space. But would writing to the Mac's larger /
                          > faster drive provide a speed benefit, especially since the rendering
                          > was being done over the network?

                          Depends on what the speed bottleneck is. It's quite possible that the
                          networking overhead slows down the transfer speed. Just try by stitching
                          a large panorama.

                          Some hardware recommendations (2.18):
                          http://www.ptgui.com/support.html#2_18

                          > I'll have to try that again.
                          >
                          > Now - what about Enblend / Smartblend. Will they also use the
                          > external drive (if set as the preferred directory in PTgui's
                          > preferences) to write their temp files to. I know that on the Mac
                          > (when using Xblend to pBlend to Enblend combo) that the files are
                          > written to the boot directory (unless Enblend is started from the
                          > command line, I think).

                          Enblend/smartblend will not use PTGui's temp dir setting. I'm not sure
                          where they write temp files though.

                          Joost
                        • Manfred Kröger
                          You re definitely talking about an outdated version of smartblend. Those old versions were quite fast but they weren t able to handle large or 16 bit panos.
                          Message 12 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            You're definitely talking about an outdated version of smartblend. Those
                            old versions were quite fast but they weren't able to handle large or 16
                            bit panos. Try the current version (or anything after 1.20, I think) on
                            a larger panorama and you will see that it's not Windows that's
                            swapping, it's smartblend! (I've seen my HDD's light flickering the
                            whole weekend while smartblend tried to blend a 274Mpx panorama. Memory
                            usage was only a few hundred MB out of my 2GB.)

                            If you ask me: On LoveFilm's laptop it's probably the 2.5'' drive that's
                            slowing the processing down.


                            Manfred

                            Fulvio Senore wrote:
                            >
                            > I am still using version 1.1.7 and ram surely improves its performance.
                            > When I stitch a pano (15 Mpx images), memory usage goes up to about 1.5
                            > GB for one or more very short moments.
                            > Now that I have 2GB of ram those are very short moments, when I had 1 GB
                            > the program started swapping and those moments were eternal.
                            >
                            > My opinion is that smartblend only uses the HD to read input images and
                            > write the output image. Of course with large images this can take some
                            > time. Then smartblend simply allocates memory from Windows when it needs
                            > it: if there is not enough memory Windows will start swapping. Some time
                            > ago, when I tried to modify enblend 1.x, I discovered that this is not
                            > an efficient way to handle a low memory situation. Explicitly swapping
                            > to temporary files from the application can be much faster. This is what
                            > enblend did: I disabled it and performance dropped.
                            >
                            > So having a lot of ram is very important for smartblend to run quickly:
                            > I have found that it is much faster then enblend 2.x.
                            >
                            > Fulvio Senore
                            >
                            > Manfred Kröger ha scritto:
                            > > I'm not really sure more RAM will improve smartblend's speed. It seems
                            > > to me that in order to process large images all the blending is done on
                            > > the hdd. This would explain why smartblend needed 14 GB on my drive
                            > > while the processor's and the RAM's usage was very low.
                            > >
                            > > Manfred
                            > >
                            > > Michael Asgian wrote:
                            > >
                            > >> Your hardware resources are kind of to small for what you do. Push
                            > >> more RAM if you can, you may have an empty slot... it will help alot,
                            > >> and ram is cheap lately.
                            > >>
                            > >> My problem wih smartblend are crashes... crashes my render machine
                            > >> from time to time... that's kind of anoying. especially when I'm
                            > >> running batch renderings... Dident try the latest beta yet,
                            > >>
                            > >> Anyone also experiences crashes? any fix?
                            > >>
                            > >> Mike
                            > >>
                            > >> LoveFilm <lovefilm@... <mailto:lovefilm%40yahoo.com>
                            > <mailto:lovefilm%40yahoo.com>> wrote: Can
                            > >> any one recount their rendering experiences using Smartblend?
                            > >>
                            > >> It gives great results but the processing time on my PC is outrageous.
                            > >> Is this normal?
                            > >>
                            > >> 31 image pano (three images in the sky intentionally left out)
                            > >>
                            > >> 8777 x 3072
                            > >>
                            > >> Processing 12 images per row.
                            > >>
                            > >> Smartblend reports a 5 hour + processing time to render just the first
                            > >> 12 images! And about 18hrs to render all of them at once.
                            > >>
                            > >> I'm on a Dell laptop - 1.6 mhz, 500mg ram. There is about 3.5 gig
                            > >> availbale on my boot drive.
                            > >>
                            > >> I know this is not an optimal system for this type of work. Does
                            > >> anyone know what kind of realistic speed improvements I might expect
                            > >> with a higher end configuration?
                            > >>
                            > >> Also - I think I saw some posts regarding this somewhere. Is there
                            > >> any equivalent to Samrtblend for the Mac?
                            > >>
                            > >>
                            > >>
                            > >>
                            > >>
                            > >>
                            > >> ---------------------------------
                            > >> Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great
                            > >> rates starting at 1¢/min.
                            > >>
                            > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            > >>
                            > >>
                            > >>
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > --
                            > >
                            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            >
                            >
                          • Dave 360texas.com
                            Thank you for clarifying the process. Maybe Enblend and Smartblend authors can also help clarify where their work files are maintained. Dave ... assigned ...
                            Message 13 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Thank you for clarifying the process. Maybe Enblend and Smartblend
                              authors can also help clarify where their work files are maintained.

                              Dave
                              --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Joost Nieuwenhuijse <imim@...>
                              wrote:
                              >
                              > > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Dave 360texas.com"
                              > > <texas360dave@> wrote:
                              > >> I think PTgui and Blending occurs on the Harddrive. I noticed a
                              > >> 1/3rd decrease in stitching/blending time when in PTgui I
                              assigned
                              > >> my 80gb external hard drive PTgui workspace.
                              > >>
                              > >> I also noticed that PTgui creates TMP work files on my external
                              HD
                              > >> because I found 8 of them. I ask Joost if it was safe to
                              remove
                              > >> them. He said yes, PTgui 5.8.4 creates them but does not
                              remove
                              > >> them after closing the program.
                              >
                              > Only the jpegs generated by the Preview button will be left on the
                              > drive; PTGui cannot delete them because the preview application
                              may
                              > still be running. All other temp files are cleaned up properly.
                              >
                              > LoveFilm wrote:
                              > > I Networked my PC and Mac, and assigned the Mac's hard drive as
                              an
                              > > additional temporary directory. Seemed to work well as I needed
                              > > access to more HD space. But would writing to the Mac's larger /
                              > > faster drive provide a speed benefit, especially since the
                              rendering
                              > > was being done over the network?
                              >
                              > Depends on what the speed bottleneck is. It's quite possible that
                              the
                              > networking overhead slows down the transfer speed. Just try by
                              stitching
                              > a large panorama.
                              >
                              > Some hardware recommendations (2.18):
                              > http://www.ptgui.com/support.html#2_18
                              >
                              > > I'll have to try that again.
                              > >
                              > > Now - what about Enblend / Smartblend. Will they also use the
                              > > external drive (if set as the preferred directory in PTgui's
                              > > preferences) to write their temp files to. I know that on the
                              Mac
                              > > (when using Xblend to pBlend to Enblend combo) that the files are
                              > > written to the boot directory (unless Enblend is started from the
                              > > command line, I think).
                              >
                              > Enblend/smartblend will not use PTGui's temp dir setting. I'm not
                              sure
                              > where they write temp files though.
                              >
                              > Joost
                              >
                            • Michael Norel
                              Smartblend allocate temporary files in Windows temporary directory for current user. I plan to add option, to define directory for temporary files. ... a ...
                              Message 14 of 14 , Aug 2, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Smartblend allocate temporary files in Windows temporary directory
                                for current user. I plan to add option, to define directory for
                                temporary files.

                                --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Dave 360texas.com"
                                <texas360dave@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Thank you for clarifying the process. Maybe Enblend and Smartblend
                                > authors can also help clarify where their work files are maintained.
                                >
                                > Dave
                                > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Joost Nieuwenhuijse <imim@>
                                > wrote:
                                > >
                                > > > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Dave 360texas.com"
                                > > > <texas360dave@> wrote:
                                > > >> I think PTgui and Blending occurs on the Harddrive. I noticed
                                a
                                > > >> 1/3rd decrease in stitching/blending time when in PTgui I
                                > assigned
                                > > >> my 80gb external hard drive PTgui workspace.
                                > > >>
                                > > >> I also noticed that PTgui creates TMP work files on my
                                external
                                > HD
                                > > >> because I found 8 of them. I ask Joost if it was safe to
                                > remove
                                > > >> them. He said yes, PTgui 5.8.4 creates them but does not
                                > remove
                                > > >> them after closing the program.
                                > >
                                > > Only the jpegs generated by the Preview button will be left on
                                the
                                > > drive; PTGui cannot delete them because the preview application
                                > may
                                > > still be running. All other temp files are cleaned up properly.
                                > >
                                > > LoveFilm wrote:
                                > > > I Networked my PC and Mac, and assigned the Mac's hard drive as
                                > an
                                > > > additional temporary directory. Seemed to work well as I needed
                                > > > access to more HD space. But would writing to the Mac's
                                larger /
                                > > > faster drive provide a speed benefit, especially since the
                                > rendering
                                > > > was being done over the network?
                                > >
                                > > Depends on what the speed bottleneck is. It's quite possible that
                                > the
                                > > networking overhead slows down the transfer speed. Just try by
                                > stitching
                                > > a large panorama.
                                > >
                                > > Some hardware recommendations (2.18):
                                > > http://www.ptgui.com/support.html#2_18
                                > >
                                > > > I'll have to try that again.
                                > > >
                                > > > Now - what about Enblend / Smartblend. Will they also use the
                                > > > external drive (if set as the preferred directory in PTgui's
                                > > > preferences) to write their temp files to. I know that on the
                                > Mac
                                > > > (when using Xblend to pBlend to Enblend combo) that the files
                                are
                                > > > written to the boot directory (unless Enblend is started from
                                the
                                > > > command line, I think).
                                > >
                                > > Enblend/smartblend will not use PTGui's temp dir setting. I'm not
                                > sure
                                > > where they write temp files though.
                                > >
                                > > Joost
                                > >
                                >
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.