Skip navigation
iwouldntknow
iwouldntknow
Currently Being Moderated

Any one seeing lag with the smudge tool in CS6?

Mar 23, 2012 10:14 PM

the smudge tool seems to be dragging hard in CS6 beta with the same tool preset and file that i was using in CS5, while all the other brushes and tools seem snappier if anything?

3381 Views   23 Replies   Latest reply: ckc48, Apr 6, 2012 7:28 AM
 
Replies
  • Noel Carboni
    21,324 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    1. Noel Carboni,
    Mar 23, 2012 11:06 PM   in reply to iwouldntknow
    Report

    Yes, I see that too.  Quite a slow motion response I'd say.  One single stroke with a modest sized brush hasn't finished in all the time I'm typing this.

     

    It does keep up better with quite small brushes.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • -Agfaclack-
    Currently Being Moderated
    2. -Agfaclack-,
    Mar 24, 2012 3:09 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni
    Report

    me too

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • PECourtejoie
    5,074 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    3. PECourtejoie,
    Mar 24, 2012 3:22 AM   in reply to iwouldntknow
    Report

    For troubleshooting sake: is it the case with all settings? Noel reports smaller lags with smaller brushes (which is to be expected, but useful to report)

    16 bits or 8 bits, etc?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • -Agfaclack-
    Currently Being Moderated
    4. -Agfaclack-,
    Mar 24, 2012 3:32 AM   in reply to PECourtejoie
    Report

    8 bit and 16 bit images. brush size over 80-100 pixel are very slow on a 8bit 2000x2000 pixel image.

     

    CS5 is much faster for the same brush size, even on bigger (5D MK2) 16bit images.

     

     

    win7 64 bit

    i7 2600k

    16 GB ram

    GTX 460

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • iwouldntknow
    Currently Being Moderated
    5. iwouldntknow,
    Mar 24, 2012 4:31 AM   in reply to PECourtejoie
    Report

    i use a very simple round brush to freehand "sweep" lines through colour patches. 10-35 pixles. drags quite badly, and the actual brush behaviour seems diffrent- it seems to "smear" more than pull the art with the same tool settings in cs5 at %100 strength. i can improve performance by only using one layer, but even then it's noticably laggy. as i said it surprised me because most everything else feels more responsive.i exclusively work in 8 bit, but i can have a play around to see what else is happening.

     

    mac osx lion 10.7.3

    intel I5 3.69ghz

    16g ram

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • eclic
    Currently Being Moderated
    6. eclic,
    Mar 24, 2012 6:03 PM   in reply to iwouldntknow
    Report

    i would check your GPU settings in the performance prefs. I have mine set to Basic always. seems best for my computers.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • xristosss
    Currently Being Moderated
    7. xristosss,
    Mar 25, 2012 3:47 AM   in reply to iwouldntknow
    Report

    Yes you are right check the post here http://forums.adobe.com/message/4285759#4285759

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    21,324 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    8. Noel Carboni,
    Mar 25, 2012 11:16 AM   in reply to iwouldntknow
    Report

    Might be nice to hear from some of the Adobe folks on this.  Performance for the Smudge Tool definitely seems down from CS5, though it's not unusable for small things.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • PixbyTed
    Currently Being Moderated
    9. PixbyTed,
    Mar 26, 2012 9:17 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni
    Report

    I find no significant difference with either blur or smudge. CS6 allows for larger brush sizes than CS5. COuld that be the problem?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • -Agfaclack-
    Currently Being Moderated
    10. -Agfaclack-,
    Mar 26, 2012 9:48 AM   in reply to PixbyTed
    Report

    PixbyTed wrote:

     

    I find no significant difference with either blur or smudge. CS6 allows for larger brush sizes than CS5. COuld that be the problem?

     

    -Agfaclack- wrote:

    8 bit and 16 bit images. brush size over 80-100 pixel are very slow on a 8bit 2000x2000 pixel image.

     

    as i wrote,.. 80 pixel are not a huge brush size.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • PixbyTed
    Currently Being Moderated
    11. PixbyTed,
    Mar 26, 2012 10:16 AM   in reply to -Agfaclack-
    Report

    Sorry I missed your note about the brush size. I agree, those are actually small brush sizes. I start to notice a lag when I am up to 1000 px. Possibly a video board issue? I think CS6 makes more extensive use of video memory.

     


    Not with blur and sharpen, but I did notice an increasing lag time using dodge and burn after opening and saving many different images. A reboot solved it making me think there could be a memory leak issue. Perhaps the same with smudge?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pattie F
    Currently Being Moderated
    12. Pattie F,
    Apr 5, 2012 10:43 AM   in reply to iwouldntknow
    Report

    Are all of you using a pen and drawing tablet or a mouse?

     

    Thanks,

    Pattie

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • iwouldntknow
    Currently Being Moderated
    13. iwouldntknow,
    Apr 5, 2012 10:49 AM   in reply to Pattie F
    Report

    using wacom cintiq, here.

    from observation, i'm pretty sure the smudge tool isn't video accellerated in cs5 but i dunno if that's changed in cs6

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • M Shaw
    Currently Being Moderated
    14. M Shaw,
    Apr 5, 2012 11:52 AM   in reply to iwouldntknow
    Report

    For folks that are encountering this, what is the Cache Tile Size set to? (Prefs/Performance pane) Does setting tile size to 128 inprove performance at all?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • nickna12
    Currently Being Moderated
    15. nickna12,
    Apr 5, 2012 12:13 PM   in reply to M Shaw
    Report

    Yes, changing the Tile Size to 128 removed the lag for me. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • PixbyTed
    Currently Being Moderated
    16. PixbyTed,
    Apr 5, 2012 12:58 PM   in reply to Pattie F
    Report

    I'm using a Wacom Intuous 4 when I notice the lag. I first thought it was only dodge and burn (since that's usually the last steps in my workflow) but it happens with the healing brushes too. I seldom use sharpen, blur or smear so I can't comment.

     

     

    As a Duh! moment, I'm going to check my Wacom driver. I remeber having problems with the tablet installation, and still some apps (like Xrite i1) don't detect the Wacom mouse.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    21,324 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    17. Noel Carboni,
    Apr 5, 2012 1:45 PM   in reply to M Shaw
    Report

    Hi M Shaw,

     

    My Cache et. al. were set as follows and I could easily reproduce the issue on Photoshop CS5.

     

    PerformanceSettings.jpg

     

    Changing to 128K made no difference.  The tool just crawls.  I'm not sure this is a new issue.

     

    I'm running PS CS6 on a VMware virtual machine with the AllowOldGPUs tweak, so I have some rudimentary GPU acceleration, but I'm about to install Photoshop CS6 on my main workstation.  I'll report back...

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • PixbyTed
    Currently Being Moderated
    18. PixbyTed,
    Apr 5, 2012 6:06 PM   in reply to M Shaw
    Report

    Changing to 128 didn’t change the performance  for me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    21,324 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    19. Noel Carboni,
    Apr 5, 2012 7:12 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni
    Report

    Just so we're managing expectations here...

     

    I select the Smudge (finger) Tool.  Set it to 100 pixels, fuzzy-edged brush, 50% strength.

     

    On a 16 bits/channel image 1500 x 600 pixels and 2 layers, dragging the tool from corner to corner takes:

     

    • 3 seconds with Sample All Layers turned off.
    • 6 seconds with Sample All Layers turned on.

     

    The timing is just the same in PS CS5 and CS6.  So I'm not seeing any kind of new problem.

     

    The effect is so smooth I'm thinking this is just the computational overhead of doing the Smudge operation all in the CPU.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor.Dennis
    1,787 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    20. Trevor.Dennis,
    Apr 5, 2012 8:02 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni
    Report

    1.1 seconds and 1.6 seconds.  Shift clicking from one corner to the other, and tried five times each to check for stop watch errors.  (It was coming out within a tenth second each time).    I wondered of lots layers would make a difference, but it seemed not to.

     

    It's 3:00pm here, and I have not done a stroke of proper work today, and I have a two day deadline, but no motivation.    The sun is shining.  The harvesters are out there scooping up grapes, (THIS was shot about 100 metres from where I am sitting, but back in 2008).  and I have just started the latest Vince Flynn book on my Kindle.   If only I didn't feel so bad about it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    21,324 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    21. Noel Carboni,
    Apr 5, 2012 8:47 PM   in reply to Trevor.Dennis
    Report

    If it's Photoshop work you have to do, then I can't imagine how you're not looking for things to stretch CS6's legs out with. 

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • iwouldntknow
    Currently Being Moderated
    22. iwouldntknow,
    Apr 6, 2012 5:11 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni
    Report

    here's the difference for me- cs6 seems to act differently than cs5, which lets you "draw" with the smudge tool- cs5 and 6 feel about the same untill the smudge tool is at %100 strength, then cs6 feels like it's working MUCH harder to keep up

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • ckc48
    Currently Being Moderated
    23. ckc48,
    Apr 6, 2012 7:28 AM   in reply to iwouldntknow
    Report

    Yes, with the smudge tool and with ordinary brushes as well. I have no way of measuring if it is worse than previous versions--but it certainly isn't better. And this happens even with relatively small brushes, especially when doing one stroke after the other (like in drawing in or smudging hair strands). It's make a few strokes, pause for the moving hoop, do a few more strokes, pause again, etc.

     

    I find it strange because for other  functions this version is noticeably faster. I've just opened a 3.65 GB file in the time it used to take to open a regular 60MB file before. I've never seen this type of speed before. But when it comes to brush strokes--with any tool and any size brush--I'm very disappointed.

     

    I have more than enough memory (12GB RAM) and an NVidea video card that should be able to handle more. I don't think the trouble is with my system, I think it is a feature that wasn't optimized for this version.

     
    |
    Mark as:
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points