>> Also keeping in mind that CS6 ( Adobe denies this) leaks Ram like Kate M snorts coke... ( after checking this forum i started to keep an eye on this)... So opening and closing PS , get used to it...
There are no major leaks known in CS6 -- do you actually get an error about being out of RAM, or have Photoshop use more RAM than the limit you set in preferences? Or are you just misinterpreting the normal behavior of Photoshop (allocate up to the limit and reuse the memory) as a "leak"?
CS6 ( Adobe denies this) leaks Ram like Kate M snorts coke... ( after checking this forum i started to keep an eye on this)... So opening and closing PS , get used to it...
Julien, with all due respect, I question whether you can actually tell. What are your criteria for making this statement?
Do you understand Adobe's approach to memory management? It's not like other apps, but it's justifiable. You expect Photoshop to allow you to manipulate gigabyte sized datasets interactively; you're likely not doing that with too many other apps.
In the same thread in which you're complaining about performance on large images you're dissing Adobe for bending over backwards to manage RAM in a way that benefits Photoshop's performance.
It's one thing to think these things, but to write them on a public forum invites debate.
Well in search of an awnser and more detail to my problem: works less well after some time,
Some one mentioned mem leaks, so i wikied' mem leaks, read about it and searched 3 different ways to log Memory usage...
I am still logging i will try to keep kt up 1 month,
Untill now what i see is that ps starts of with 1gb ram usage while working, klimbs klimbs klimbs during same photo, but does not give it back on photo closing, then opening second image, again continues climbing, untill it arrives at its max after a bit of time, and blocks ... Or freezes.... Etc etc
On thursdauy, PS even used more ram than i gave it ( 13GB instead of 12 allocated) while photomerging,
And now it has alwo 120gigs of SSD scratch , but not under the impression its used, no data going to that disk....
I ll keep logging, in order to transfer maybe some usefull data, one day...
My point is not that it can t use all the ram it gets from me, i dont care, but that it freezes without reason when the number gets high on a basic image...
An,other thing is the sudden usage of 130% ( it varie) usage of processor without doing any thing...
I realy don t see what i can do more to my setups...
( clean installs all updates, loads of ram ssd s, mhm just waiting for,13.02, maybe)
I have to say it works well, as long as one opens and closes it every 2 images ...
What you just described: allocating up to the limt and reusing memory, is completely normal for applications like Photoshop. Freeing and reallocating memory would make it run much slower. When Photoshop hits the limit you set and you still load more data - then it can spill to the scratch disk, and will run slower for a bit.
If the usage goes over the limit set, that could be because of OS overhead, it could be something else causing a leak (drivers, OS, etc.), or it might be an actual Photoshop leak that we haven't seen in our testing.
>> I have to say it works well, as long as one opens and closes it every 2 images ...
Try using it without exiting all the time.
If it gets slower or has problems - then something is wrong on your system to cause a leak (most common causes are drivers and the OS, but Photoshop does have some unfixed leaks in less common code paths).
I think, chris was right all a long, !!!!
It was an OTHER app on my computer blocking everything,
Only thing , : the OTHER app was called: "Bridge" .. since the update of Bridge yesterday, no problems at all ...
Mhm any way, its only an idea how to judge now.. PS & Bridge are they together ?...
Noel Carboni wrote:
- Photoshop CS6 got to "Aligning Layers" at 2:07, "Blend Selected Layers" at 5:52, and finished at 10:30.
- Final pano was 344 megapixels in 25 layers at 16 bits/channel.
- Photoshop CS6 created two scratch files, totaling 109 GB during this process.
FYI, my new 12 core system with 48 GB RAM completed the same stitch in 6:46, using 38.3 GB of system RAM in the process and writring the SAME 109 GB of scratch space.
So, Julien, are you still finding everything working AOK with the new version of Bridge? I've never liked Bridge I never run it. It never occurred to me to mention that before.
no stress to reply at this moment, runs fine..
You see it wasn't the " users - system " fault.. it just was some thing in the package.. and OK it wasn't the photoshop teams fault but hey it's sold in 1 package so it's the same app..
but for now it's fine... So we're using it..
( only in the process of the misary we discoverd new things - apps to watch , so .. yeah that's that ..)
That's why we ask about other applications running at the same time.
Bridge did have a bug that could cause it to write excessive error logs on some systems - and that could slow things down depending on your system. That was fixed in the Bridge dot release.
Of coarse same issues here. Open/Save file times real slow. Image magnification, slow. Magnification in the liquify filter, really slow. Sometimes brushes take a while to catch up with me.
Windows 7 pro 64bit
AMD FX-8150 3.6Ghz 8-core
Radeon HD 6970 2GB (With lates driver update)
I have the coretemp desktop widget displayed on my second monitor along with the GPU usage widget.
While using the program saving opening files etc:, Photoshop will not use more than 18% of my CPU and only 4 of the cores. (Lightroom will use all 100% CPU and sometimes up to 30% GPU, durring photo exports) I usually have Lightroom, Outlook, and Firefox open, regardless if all programs open or closed photoshop will only use 18% and never affects GPU load. I even temporarily over clocked my CPU to 4.2Ghz and still no change.
Here are my performace settings, I dont know if these are how they should be setup. But here they are, I just changed the cache size from reading this thread today, problem still persists.
RAM usage: 80%(23779MB) History Cache: 49. Cache levels: 6. Cache tile size: 128k. 2 scratch disks set, both 7200rpm w/ more than 1T free space. Use graphics Processor box checked.
How do I check what version of photoshop I am running, unless there are no new versions since cs6 was released? and are my setting set up properly?
I use the AMD processor because a few articles I read said the AMD FX-8150 ran photoshop and other adobe programs better/more efficient than the intel 2700K. Not sure if thats true, but it was also much cheaper.
I just did the update to 13.01 and the problem is still there. All the same problems as I stated before. The only difference, for the first 27% of the save it will use 40% CPU usage. But fro the remailing 73% of the save progress it drops back down to 18% max CPU at 48 seconds using the same file as tested before(16bit, RGB, 12 layers, 545mb). I tried another file (16 bit, RGB, 7 layers, 302MB) using 15% CPU at 23 seconds. Both only utilize 4 of the 8 cores. And I cannot duplicate that CPU usage spike up to 40%.
When you magnify an image in liquify to 75% or about it takes about 3 seconds per magnification. When you magnify an image to 75% or above within the regular document, there is only a split second lag, at most sometimes a 1 second lag.
I am just going off how smooth everything ran in CS5, and I just upgraded to this CPU from a smaller AMD CPU about 3 weeks ago, same problems with my old CPU, I thought an upgrade would solve the problem. I am not looking for miracles, just faster save times, the rest I can live with.
A Save operation normally uses more CPU time doing compression during the first part of the save. There's also some time in there generating a flattened composite. Have you tried an experiment where you turn off compression and/or Maximize Compatibility and seeing how those affect your save times?
Have you run Resource Monitor to see what the throughput to the disk is? A SATA hard drive can only support a limited speed.
I see where you've said the file is 545mb, but (assuming that's what you read from within Photoshop) what's the size of the file actually on disk?
What are the pixel counts?
Are you using any smart objects?
I don't doubt that you are experiencing unexpected sluggishness. I think getting more into the specifics might help lead to some suggestions for making it work better on your system (or making your system work better for supporting Photoshop).
Do you have a UPS on your system? Because if so there's a caching setting I'm going to suggest:
As far as magnification times in Liquify, yes, I see several seconds of delay after a zoom tool click between 66.66% and 100%. Probably just the nature of how they've coded the tool.
I just checked recourse monitor and photshop does jump to 2nd from the top at around 52mil B/Sec read and about the same for write time. Only two times during the 45 second save time does my drive cap out, but only for about 1 second each time.
The file sizes I gave you are the size on disc.
No I do not use UPS
As for smart objects, the current ones I gave you in the previous post do not. But I just opened a file with that: 3744x5616 16bit, RGB, 6 layers, one smart object, two adjustment layers, 604MB size on disk, 45 seconds to save. My workflow is all done through lightroom, I just right click>edit in>CS6 then when I am finished, ctrl+S. The lightrom settings are, AdobeRGB, 16 bit, PSD, 300ppi.
This is the same workflow as I had before in CS5 and my save times were not exceptionally faster, but they were not this slow. But I just went back into my archive and notice all my old PSDs from when I was using CS5 were 30-50% smaller file sizes. I am sure that makes up for the difference in save times.
So I am assuming my current bottleneck after viewing the resource monitor is having 2 SATA3 drives. My backup drives are USB3 externals... I dont want to spend a ton of money on a massive SSD, so Maybe one big enough just for OS and CS, then 2 SATA6 drives for the rest and keep my USB3 for backup. Do you think that would aleviate the problem a little?
That you're not maxing out your existing SATA drives probably says that there's another factor than drive speed at work here. Perhaps it's spending all its time compressing your file - something not easily multi-threaded.
As it happens I have a 4 drive SSD array on a fairly powerful computer. I just did a save of a large 10,000 x 10,000 pixel collage of 13 layers that saves at 1.3 GB in size.
With the following setting unchecked the save took about a minute. With it checked the save took 6 seconds:
Have you tried this setting?
Wow... with is checked it went from 45 to 12 seconds. 604MB to 953MB. I think that just solved our problem. haha, I think I can live with the increase in file size, I have a couple 2T backup drives. So I should be fine.
I think I still will look into SSD. That has to help improve save times and maybe I can go back to compressing my PSD files.
Do you recomend 2 SSD raid0? or can I get away with just 1?
Thanks for your help!
I use RAID but you can get a big boost in performance with just one. Save a little longer and get a bigger one than you think you need - it will work out a lot better if you're not running it near full.
I'll chime in and say Photoshop Extended CS6 has been running very slowly for me since day one, and continues to after the 13.0.1 update. In the file I'm currently working on, which is 1200x1200 @300dpi and less than 50 layers, just turning on and off visibility of a layer takes 2-3 seconds to complete. Complex brushes, smudge tool, etc lag behind cursor movements by seconds. Obviously this is greatly impacting my productivity.
My setup, which is not slow:
Mac Pro dual 2.8GHz quad-core processors
10 GB RAM
ATI Radeon 5770 w/ 1GB RAM
OS X 10.8.2
Two 7200 RPM SATA drives, both with 100+ GB available, Pshop cache set to the non-system drive
I thought perhaps Photoshop was having compatibility problems with the ATI driver since I had seen some artifacting, so I turned off the Graphics Processor, but it ended up being even slower.
The 'Efficiency' meter hasn't slipped below 100%, but it obviously has serious problems.
One thing I'll note that the smaller the window is, the faster the operations complete. If the 1200x1200 document I mentioned is at full-size, layer visibility toggles take seconds. If the window is zoomed down to 12.5%, those operations take on the order of 0.2 seconds. Of course that's not an optimal size for working with the document.
Brett, is the file in which you're seeing this 2-3 second lag something you would be willing to put online for others to download? I for one would be happy to try to open it and see if there's something in particular about the file that triggers the behavior. If it does trigger a bug I'm sure Adobe would like to see it as well.
Hi Noel, unfortunately it's not a file I can share, but this happens with most any moderately-sized file with more than a few layers. When I get a moment, I will see if I can come up with an example test file.
Soo.. the issue when layers thumbnails slowed down application work -- any news about particularly this one? Same thing with text styles?
Also, where is it possible to see full list of fixes in latest release patches?
My trial has expired, but I'm sort of afraid to buy CS6 until most of these people in this thread get what they want :-)
That's a tough one, Alex. Frankly I don't blame you for not buying the software based on the 13.0.0. demo version, and without being able to try 13.0.1 directly you'll have to either wait until you stop hearing bug reports (not likely to happen, since forums are a magnet for problem reports), or maybe give the cloud rental model a try... You could conceivably pay for a month of Photoshop 13.0.1 use without having to break the bank, then either buy, continue renting, or stop and wait for another update.
I can only say I find Photoshop CS6 13.0.1 fine to use, but then I was one of the lucky ones who didn't have slowdowns with 13.0.0 either.
I wonder how many potential customers who found the 13.0 trial to be too bug-ridden will remain unwilling to purchase until they can personally run a 13.0.1 trial to their satisfaction. Some probably will try a month's subscription, I guess.
Good point. We can only imagine that anyone who ran into the "text layer shuffle" bug - or the performance problems in this thread - would swear off Adobe for at least a full version. Given the 300+ responses here, and the 124 responses in the text thread I'd say people do tend to notice these niggling little things.
That the trial is only 30 days and can only be done once per major version ought to spur Adobe into doing a MUCH better job of release prep before letting the software out into the world. Maybe actually finish it before releasing it.
Consider this: If a person hadn't used Adobe software before he/she might not know there are 0.0.x releases that make things better. Adobe could be losing customers permanently over these quality issues.
But no one really cares; a big company doesn't have much of a heart. As far as I could tell, even up to a few days ago the 13.0.0 version was still the one people were downloading for the trial.
Adobe: A dead bird in the hand is better than what, exactly?
Noel, I haven't had time to put together a test file, but this one is a pretty good example:
Try setting the smudge tool brush to around 80 and brush around on the "White 4S Portrait" layer. It should start lagging behind your input by several seconds as you smudge. It seems to have no relation to number of layers or number of vector elements, for you can delete the whole Elements folder and the same lag still occurs.
I'd be interested to know how it performs on your system (and Chris Cox as well).
I hd no problem with the Smudge tool keeping up. I turned it to mush testing that.
You don't happen to have [ ] Sample All Layers checked, do you? That's known to slow things down some, and it doesn't have that much use, especially here. And consider what it has to do! This is a ridiculously complex, deep document and it has to go combine each pixel from data from all possible layers.
I tried it in Photoshop CS5, too. Didn't seem much different, and checking [ ] Sample All Layers slowed it down to where it was more unusable than doing so in Ps CS6.
Noel Carboni wrote:
I hd no problem with the Smudge tool keeping up. I turned it to mush testing that.
Ditto. And my Mac is puny.
You don't happen to have [ ] Sample All Layers checked, do you? That's known to slow things down some...
That did make Smudge quite unusable with Brett's doc on my machine.
No, Sample All Layers was not checked. And as I said, deleting the Elements folder -- which contains most of the layers -- had no effect.
I've been using Photoshop since 2.5, so I'm not doing anything extremely dumb here. I have simpler files which are just as glacial.
Clearly you have a problem specific to your machine, then. Perhaps it's the ATI driver for your particular video card, noting your comment about how the size of the window on the screen seems to affect it.
I can't begin to imagine what that is; it may be a complex bug or it may be something as simple as a setting somewhere we have configured differently, and it may be that a number of people share this problem.
All I can say is this: Keep looking for a solution - it can work as well as or better than its predecessors.
Noel, It's possible it is an ATI conflict, though I haven't had problems with 3D applications. I don't think it's an OpenGL issue because, as I said prior, I tried turning off the Graphics Processor and it was even slower.
I brought this up to Adobe engineers during the 13.0.0 era, and I was told not to worry, it was the thumbnail issue. Well, 13.0.1 underscored that it's not the thumbnail issue. I'm getting more than a bit irritated at this point, as I expect at a minimum that Photoshop be the speedy beast it has been in the past. It is not. I'm not saying the fault necessarily lies in Photoshop CS6's code, but I paid too much to be stuck with a slow product. I'm happy to work with engineers to figure it out. Is there a better channel for support than this forum?