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

Re: Smartblend speed

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
    View Source
    • 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 2 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
      View Source
      • 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 3 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
        View Source
        • 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 4 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
          View Source
          • 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 5 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
            View Source
            • 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 6 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
              View Source
              • 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 7 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                View Source
                • 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 8 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                  View Source
                  • 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 9 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                    View Source
                    • 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 10 of 14 , Aug 1, 2006
                      View Source
                      • 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 11 of 14 , Aug 2, 2006
                        View Source
                        • 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.