Mike Chaney's Tech Corner
December 02, 2020, 02:46:55 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Feb 2013: Qimage Ultimate Challenges... have fun and explore features!
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Professional Photo Printing for Windows
Print with
Qimage and see what you've been missing!
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: v2009.258 available  (Read 9062 times)
admin
Administrator
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3181



View Profile Email
« on: June 04, 2009, 04:17:11 PM »

http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/downloads.htm

v2009.258 06/04/09

Priority: Low

v2009.258 offers a smoother and faster thumbnail builder that includes bug fixes for all Qimage editions plus a dramatic speed improvement for building raw thumbnails in the Studio Edition.

Mike
« Last Edit: June 14, 2009, 02:34:30 PM by Mike Chaney » Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3197



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2009, 07:20:49 PM »

Mike,
RAW thumb building checks, a folder with 102 Canon 350D CR2 files:
On a Core 2 Duo, 2GHz laptop I'm seeing about a 30% improvement on thumb build speed, ie. from 1.8s/thumb to 1.25s/thumb.
On a P4, 3.6GHz dual memory Desktop PC a 12% improvement from 1.5 to 1.3s/thumb.
Is this the order of improvement to expect on these machines? I guess a quad core will be much better.
Terry.
Logged
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5372



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2009, 08:41:23 PM »

Terry,
I have the quad core, but I can only compare speed of rebuild from version 209 to this new version.
48 Raws in a folder, took 49 secs in 209, and 21 secs with the new version. I don't have a running copy of 250.
Fred
Logged
Terry-M
The Honourable Metric Mann
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3197



View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2009, 08:47:40 PM »

Fred,
Thanks for the feedback. It looks like v258 makes a significant difference with a quad core machine but less on those with older processors.
Terry.
Logged
PH Focal-Scape
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 262



View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2009, 08:57:01 PM »


v2009.258 offers a smoother and faster thumbnail builder that includes bug fixes for all Qimage editions plus a dramatic speed improvement for building raw thumbnails in the Studio Edition.

Mike

Hello Mike,

For a folder containing about 40 16bit TIFFs varying in size from  6 to 500 MB I didn't notice any difference in thumbnail generation speed (totally subjective). But maybe this is the type of file?

Using a dual core AMD 2.2GHz and 3GB RAM.

Thanks

PETER
Logged

admin
Administrator
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3181



View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2009, 09:29:26 PM »

The speed increase is mainly for raw photos.  TIFF, JPEG, and other thumbs will generate slightly faster but you may or may not be able to notice it.  Raw thumbnails should generate about twice as fast on a quad core machine and you should see up to a 50% improvement on a dual core machine.  Also when building raw thumbnails, operation of Qimage (menus and such) should not be "jerky" like it was before where old versions would pause as each raw thumbnail is being built: only if you scroll past where the thumbs have already been generated and it has to build them in your current view.

Mike
Logged
Fred A
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 5372



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2009, 10:04:05 AM »

Quote
The speed increase is mainly for raw photos.

Hey guys and gals. I have an oopsie here to report.
I was checking thumb rebuild speeds on my Vista Quad core getting abysmal results. Three times slower than my XP machine.
I checked and rechecked, and even after (good advice) waiting for Vista to settle in for a solid 5+ minutes before making any tests, the results were still abysmal.

Then I covered my head with aluminum foil, and a message came through from Qimage.... (guru)   
"DID YOU SET THE PREFERENCES TO QUAD CORE IN VISTA?"

Yepper, you got that right. I forgot that detail.
Now I get 157 images 57 secs in XP, and 1:01 in Vista; close enough to be called a photo finish.

With Quad core off in Vista, and many rechecks, 3:39 secs was the best I could get.

I know my bulb is dimming as I get older, but maybe someone else might have overlooked this setting?

Fred Cry Cry Cry
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!