You responded to me, but I haven't had a crash at all, Pattie, save for a couple I caused on purpose to see how the Auto Save works. So I'm assuming you're asking ab_63 and nuisance graphics for their crash specifics.
If anyone from Adobe would like to speak to me directly about this I am more than happy to do so. I have many students who have severe lag with the Mixer Brush Tool and Bristle Tips/Erodible Tips, who have similar/identical system specs, but as ever (as in CS5) 'SAL' plays a huge role in these slowdowns (as does bristle %, length, Stiffness et al). I'm currently trying to find a remedy for these apparently random performance problems, but nothing is concrete as yet.
I realise that the previous 'Texture' issue has been fixed (or at least minimised), but there is still some Mixer brush/SAL performance issues that have clearly not been addressed!
You are free to email me personally via tjs @ timshelbourne .net
Incidentally, this was one of my students who posted originally, without any prompting from myself.
Message was edited by: TimShelbourne
I am having the same problems as the OP and am able to make the brushes workable, but just barely, by keeping the longest side of the file about 1600 px and using Tall and Thin in History and Cache, AND increasing spacing in the brush settings.
I have tried all of the other suggestions without any improvement, these three are the only things that help at all.
I didn't have much of a problem in CS5 even though at that time I had half the RAM I have now.
I really think this is a problem with CS6 and not with our machines, and I'm relatively certain it can be fixed.
I have a relatively powerful machine and a crash with CS5 was a rarity, but use a mixer brush of a certain size and CS6 will crash all day. Interestingly I had problems with the LightRoom 4 beta crashing as well, but as soon as I installed the release version they stopped.
I am hoping for the same thing with CS6
I am also one of Tim Shelbourne's students and I posted about this on Saturday, but no one responded.
Brush spacing does make a difference, but it's only good if we're confusing it with texture within the stroke (to cover up the tyre-tracks)
I'd be interested to know how much of the brush performance has been passed over to the GPU in CS6? I'm hoping that Adobe will elucidate a little in this regard?
I see no significant difference at all. The Mixer brush has always been dependent on ppi/brush size/document size/SAL option. My fear is that this is one of those fundamental product/performance issues that will just get buried once again, and that's a shame.
Just a thought. Let's rationalise this a bit. Test in CS6.. restart (The machine, not the App!), test in CS5.. and report? That might be meaningful? (Regardless of CPU/GPU specific results!)
I've kind of been hoping that maybe somehow more GPU power can be applied to it to make it faster.
I did a whole painting not long ago in PS CS5, where I started with a Photo on a lower layer then brushed the whole thing with Mixer Brush strokes using several different bristle brushes. The photo supplied me with the color and I essentially retextured the whole thing. Came out quite nice, but I did notice that I was struggling a bit all along to keep the spacing small enough so as not to leave those ''tire tracks'' as you call them, while having the brush be the size I wanted for the overall look. I did it in 16 bits (I do most everything in 16 bits as a habit), and at a fairly large size (overall PSD file was a bit under 400 MB at the end). In hindsight I could have gotten away with using 8 bits for probably some benefit in speed. A little embossing left me with a realistic looking oil painting effect. Here's a downsized crop from that effort...
That's a nice result Noel, but 16bit is really pointless when you're talking about a painting! 8 bits or less, sensibly! There's no way we need that degree of colour depth in a painting! Embossing is good, but it's a finishing touch. Include your texture within the brush, not as an addition. And image size (pixel dimensions) should not be a concern.
This is good work nevertheless... painting is not about the brushes, it's about the way you use the brush.
A note to all with this issue:
Assuming you all have verified your video card is supported at :
In an effort to reproduce and determine the cause of this issue, please reply with the following:
1) can you tell me what brush presets you were using?
2) how many of you are using a pen and drawing tablet as opposed to a mouse?
Yes, Mike is the one who wanted to know about which preset brushes were used, but I see he has obtained a lot more info offline now. Also, Adam is looking into whether the tablet may be related. I'd still like to get that from everyone. We have several people looking to different possible causes and trying to reproduce what you see. I'm just trying to get all the info in one place so we know what we are dealing with. Thanks for your help.
The delay in the Smudge tool was mentioned in another recent thread and reducing Cache Tile Size to 128 as a solution. I have delay in Smudge and Mixer tools with 1024 as the Cache Tile Size but when I reduce it to 128, both tools work ok. Please can someone tell me what the Cache Tile is and what real world effect reducing its size has. Thanks.
W7 Ultimate; 2700K; 16Gb ram; p8z68 Deluxe/GEN3 motherboard; Gainward GTX 560 Ti Phantom vga card; 256Gb SSD for OS and programs, x2 WD Velociraptors for data; 150Gb Intel SSD for scratch disk.
Europe, Middle East and Africa