Question about memory usage in PI XL

[NetButch]

I have a question for you jim.

what are you doing that your files are SO big?

my RAW files from my Nikon D100 are only 2 or 3 MB? you are working with 30MB files at 600 DPI? are you printing billboards?

just curious.<grin>

[MaryLouW]

I was wondering that too - why the huge file size? Mine too are in the 2-3 meg size. Not sure what I'd do with one that big. Maybe that's why they have the partial load - it's very nice because you just load in the portions you want to work on and when you save, it updates the image.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color=navy>
MaryLou, RtD</font>
<hr>
<table border=0>

<tr><td align=left>
<a href=http://wwell.net>
http://www.pircnet.com/bb/buttons/ww-tutorials.gif</a></td>

<td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color=navy>
<a href=http://www.pircnet.com>PhotoImpact Resource Center (PIRC)</a>


AIM: MaryLouJW E-Mail: <a href=mailto:mlwhite@pircnet.com> mlwhite@pircnet.com</a></font></td></tr>
</table>

[carlb]

My advice; buy Photoshop.

Photoimpact isn't well suited for large files, it's just a program for some simple web graphics. Professionals don't use Photoimpact, at least I've never see any design studio using it.

[jimojimo]

Netbutch,
I'm scanning photographs, and at the 'default' 200dpi, the quality just isn't there. Some of these may be just for viewing, some for printing 8x10's. And most importantly, in crowd shots or other wide shots, I am cropping individuals or small groups in crowds. Anything less than 600 dpi will result in a very pixelated image when a small section of the original is blown up to be it's own image.

This has worked out very well, these are good shots taken with 64 or 100 speed film, and I can scan in a crystal-clear and sharp image from, say, a 1x1 inch head-shot cropped from a 3x5 photo. Much, much clearer and more detailed than a full head-shot taken with my 3.3 megapixel digital camera.

As I had said, I'm very impressed with everything else in Pixl, it I'm getting the impression that maybe I am stretching it with these images, but I didn't think it was uncommon to have images that size. I had tried scanning at 1200dpi, but pixl wouldn't even open the file, and besides, 600 seems just about right for the grain-fineness of 100 speed film prints.

But from a practical standpoint the problem is gone, though doing the math I'm still convinced that pixl is leaking memory: 5000x6000x24bit is about 90 megs (compressed jpeg is about 30meg, depending on % compression), but as far as pixl is concerned, it needs to store 90meg of pixels, regardless of what's displayed on the screen or what the .jpg file size is. Then each undo level must store the previous image. I only have 2 levels, so the current image and 2 undo's is still less than 300meg...and even if I had the full original image in the clipboard that's only another 90meg. The program itself takes 25 megs when it starts, and the rest of windows maybe 60 meg. But I'm seeing 1 gig of ram plus 1.5 gig of swapfile. And even now with the extra ram, if I don't close pixl every 1 or 2 hours I'll start hearing the thrashing start. It doesn't make sense.

Oh well, Ulead has been reasonably prompt at replying and asking for different info, etc, so they are looking at it, and maybe they'll find something. And I do appreciate all of everyone's help here, it's been enlightening. I will post any info from Ulead on this when I hear it, but for now things are pretty snappy with the added ram, so I'll just go with that.
--Jim

[gidgit]

I have but a old Visioneer scanner, as well a very small .8 megapix Canon A5, so that would explain my part in all of this http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

....interesting that your scans are better than your photo's... with me it is the other way around, no, make that... they both are about the same... and niether close to what my old Konika was able to produce...

It's all in the glass I tell ya http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

As for the app, well... maybe next year will see this kid sporting some new and much more powerful toys, to which I will remember this thread, and be sure to attemt same just to see ...

and will do such in every version from 4 up, just to get a better glimpse towards just what all the bells and whistles have cost us... the hard part is factoring in the workflow concerns, as in time spent processing vs time spent creating via PI's wide array of user friendly, multiple level, tool options...

I feel for you no doubt, and do hope you find a resolve... more ram http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif ...

and... uggg, no doubt, if something bogs and leaks...

and, yes, please keep us posted with this... most interesting http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

thanks Jim http://www.talkgraphics.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

[sallybode]

One of the issues you may need to consider is the type of processor you are using. If you have a Celeron and your board will support a P4, then you should do that. My system is running an AMD Athlon XP 2700 Thoroughbred. I have 512 RAM, an ATI video card 128mb. Except for very large gif files I have no lag at all. The problem may not be your processor, it maybe the lack of a firewall and anti-virus updates. Even with lots of precautions it is still possible to pick up a virus or spyware which does really bog down the system. Defragging will not get rid of that trouble. But regarding the processor, AMD does a great job of handling graphics. Make sure you are installing all your Windows Updates, back up your data. Windows XP Professional over XP Home has fewer problems. The only problem PI has for me is it doesn't like to open saved files from my Zip Disk.

[MaryLouW]

There is a solution to those huge files - select only the part you really want in the preview phase of the scan, then pump the res way up there. You'll get a much smaller file at a higher resolution than you would by scanning the entire thing and then cropping out what you want.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color=navy>
MaryLou, RtD</font>
<hr>
<table border=0>

<tr><td align=left>
<a href=http://wwell.net>
http://www.pircnet.com/bb/buttons/ww-tutorials.gif</a></td>

<td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color=navy>
<a href=http://www.pircnet.com>PhotoImpact Resource Center (PIRC)</a>


AIM: MaryLouJW E-Mail: <a href=mailto:mlwhite@pircnet.com> mlwhite@pircnet.com</a></font></td></tr>
</table>

[sallybode]

The installation of too many fonts can cause a lot of problems. I was playing around the other day with a lot of dingbat fonts, I downloaded and installed the zipped files. The next time I booted up I was having all sorts of problems. There is a handy note on how to have your cake and eat it too. I quote PIRC "Tips and Tricks": You don't have to install a font to use it! Simply double-click on the font to open it, then open the program(s) where you want to use the font and it will show up on the font list. The font will remain available until you close it. My suggestion, is analyze the fonts you actually use, save what you don't use to disk and/or put them in another folder rather than using your Windows font folder, then open them when you want. No more memory problems! (At least if this is the trouble!) A handy tool to have is Character Map Pro. It gives you a much better preview of what fonts have to offer. It is free and available here. http://www.5star-shareware.com/Deskt...armap-pro.html The next time you upgrade your hardware check out the following, AMD costs less than Pentium systems and offers a lot for heavy graphical applications and gamers. Newer hard drives are coming with onboard 8megs of cache which should help. And the type of RAM does make a terrific difference, use the recommended and as much of it as you can afford. If you are up to building your own system, ASUS makes great motherboards.

[jeepers]

Yep - Ive got similar problems, using a 2.4 P4, XP Pro, 32MG Video, 512MB RAM and PI 7. Frequently, I'll have multiple images open(lets say, 10) and the same thing happen to me...hard drive goe's into fits for long durations, and more than half the time program will notify me that "a required resource is needed"(or something like that, and sometimes completely lock up requiring the task manager to shut down.

I'm not sure about the technical aspects of page files and/or swap files, but interestingly enough, I didn't have the same problems with a PII 266 128MB system. Yeah, things ran "slow", but I never had a "resource" or lockup problem. Is this a pagefile or swap file problem?

I'm very interested in hearing about new developments and/or resolutions.

[coaster1robert]

Maybe you need,a good memory manager?
you should try(cachman)
http://www.outertech.com/
it's a great program!