Search found 33 matches

by pwnell
29.09.2018 23:05
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: Latest HF 7.0.1 on Mac messes up royally with this stack
Replies: 1
Views: 360

Latest HF 7.0.1 on Mac messes up royally with this stack

Please take a look at below stack. It renders completely incorrect using any method (A, B or C) and regardless whether I use DNG or TIFF. Advice? HF 6 renders it correctly. Screen Shot 2018-09-29 at 14.03.48.png ** UPDATE: 7.0.2 does the same. Resetting the adjustment parameters work - but I am not ...
by pwnell
18.04.2018 23:51
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 7 Beta crashes on Mac
Replies: 1
Views: 755

HF 7 Beta crashes on Mac

When I render a DNG stack and try to save the output to DNG file I get this (yesterday it worked so not sure why it is now broken): Process: HeliconFocus [31055] Path: /Applications/HeliconFocus.app/Contents/MacOS/HeliconFocus Identifier: com.heliconsoft.HeliconFocus Version: 0 Code Type: X86-64 (Na...
by pwnell
07.03.2018 18:48
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

That I cannot confirm as I sold it a couple of days after I got my iMac Pro so I cannot do another test.
by pwnell
07.03.2018 00:39
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Well that just made me incredibly happy as I was floored when I found out my new iMac Pro was slower with HF than my old Mac Pro 2013. Now the tables have turned. Thanks so much.
by pwnell
05.03.2018 21:54
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Not sure if I am missing something but HF 7 for Mac seems stupendously fast: Old: Mac HF 6.7.2 Method B, Adobe DNG Converter 10.2, 20 HT Cores, 128GB RAM 50 x TIFF: Run 1: 1min 55sec (one pass), Run 2: 1min 55sec (one pass) 50 x DNG: Run 1: 2min 58sec (one pass), Run 2: 2min 6sec (one pass) New: Mac...
by pwnell
05.03.2018 19:55
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Ah that makes a lot of sense, thanks.

I only allocated 16GB of RAM to the VM so that may have been it.

Will test the new 7.0.0 versions.
by pwnell
02.03.2018 18:55
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Hi Stas, I think you misread my test results. Look at the first two sets of tests: Mac HF 6.7.2 Method B, Adobe DNG Converter 10.2, 20 HT Cores 50 x TIFF: Run 1: 1min 55sec (one pass), Run 2: 1min 55sec (one pass) 50 x DNG: Run 1: 2min 58sec (one pass), Run 2: 2min 6sec (one pass) Win HF 6.8.0 Metho...
by pwnell
02.03.2018 01:25
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Hi Stas, I did some additional testing. Please see below. Very weird is that Parallels using 18 threads (leaving 2 for host machine) is twice as slow as Parallels with 10 threads (matching the actual core count) using your new version 7.0.0. I tried with and without adaptive hypervisor turned on and...
by pwnell
22.02.2018 19:07
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

I thought I'd update you with the performance differences I saw. I downloaded 6.8.0 and stacked 268 DNG images each 20.4MB and 20MP using method B, as well as the unreleased new version (On a mac stacking DNG is horribly slow but I do it for obvious reasons - stacking TIFF is way faster. On Windows ...
by pwnell
02.01.2018 21:05
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Thanks, trying it now. What is the difference between the two Method B's? (depth map and legacy)
by pwnell
29.12.2017 20:48
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

Re: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

Might I get a copy of the Windows version? I am running Parallels and that would be so awesome!
by pwnell
29.12.2017 06:25
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro
Replies: 22
Views: 4431

HF 25% slower on 10 core iMac Pro than 6 Core Mac Pro

I have just received my new iMac Pro 10 Core system. I also have a Mac Pro 2013 with 6 Cores. How is it that rendering a stack of 268 DNG files using method B, and Adobe DNG converter, takes 8min 55sec on the 6 core Mac Pro but 11min 12sec on the 10 Core iMac Pro with its much newer CPU (even though...
by pwnell
23.06.2017 17:20
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: Unnecessary idle CPU usage
Replies: 2
Views: 2043

Re: Unnecessary idle CPU usage

Seems better, thanks!
by pwnell
18.06.2017 20:24
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: Unnecessary idle CPU usage
Replies: 2
Views: 2043

Unnecessary idle CPU usage

Hi Stas, When I am finished rendering a stack on my macOS Sierra Mac Pro 2013, the CPU usage of Helicon Focus always linger on about 400% on my 6 Core Xeon. Most of this is system CPU usage. I find this strange as the rendering is complete, and while nothing is happening in Helicon Focus the CPU wil...
by pwnell
09.03.2016 19:01
Forum: Helicon Focus: Support
Topic: Latest 6.6.0 horribly slow on Mac
Replies: 7
Views: 5338

Re: Latest 6.6.0 horribly slow on Mac

Why? I am using Adobe's DNG converter and it works perfectly on 6.5.2. I am not willing to switch to a different RAW converter - I'd rather stick to 6.5.2 for the rest of time :) I stacked with 6.6.1 and 6.5.2 using DNG. For 6.6.1 the stack took 5:39. For 6.5.2 it took 4:23, thus 28% slower. See CPU...