Even More on DPP

[Edward1064]

Hi All,

As a satisfied LR Classic user, I occasionally revisit the use of DPP, especially if I hear of a major upgrade.  With LR I do miss being able to see the focus points (Apple Aperture had this).  So when I give DPP another shot, I see again the real difficulty to using it: It runs so slowly that it is essentially non-useable.   My hardware consists of a late-2017 27" iMac with 16 GB of RAM and 512 GB of SSD storage.  Graphics card is an AMD Radeon Pro 670 (4 GB storage).  In the small amount of time I have spent with DPP, the editing operations take 2-3 seconds to register each step change and dragging a photo happens in a very slow, jerky motion.  By comparison, LR is blazingly fast.  The photo files are RAW, from my 7DII.

LR provides the option of using the graphic card's processor, but there is nothing I can see in DPP's setup that mentions this.  Could that be the reason?  Am I overlooking something?

As some others have mentioned in this Forum, Canon is not a software company, and probably subs out the DPP development.  Canon's smaller user base probably does not warrant much investment in DPP.   So perhaps it is too much to expect that it could match LR's performance. 

Does anyone here have hardware like mine, without the glacially-slow performance?

Thanks for your comments!

Edward

[ArnoldvO]

---

@FloridaDrafter wrote:

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

---

@ArnoldvO wrote:

So, the question is, is this on/off option intended for both mentioned functions ("image processing" and "speed up preview display") or is it only for on/off support "image processing".

My view on this is that this on/off option is only for "image processing". ....

---

I think you are looking at that checkbox the wrong way.  There is only one checkbox, which controls only one option.

I think it somewhat unclearly states that the image processing by the GPU will only be for image previews.

---

I agree that it is poorly writen. But, this is what it looks like on my laptop with a low end dedicated AMD Radeon 4gb GPU, which might lead you to believe that your GPU could be used for image processing. Obviously that isn't true, judging from comments in this thread.

-FD

---

Seeing both screencaps, for me this supports my view on how this is supposed to work.

With 'low-end' videocard the GPU is only used for 'speed up preview display', as shown in the bottom screencap.

With a more powerfull videocard the option for using GPU for "image processing" comes available (upper screencap).

Which also means in DPP this is not working as intended, because GPU option ON or OFF has no effect, not even with a very powerfull videocard.

[wq9nsc]

DPP also still has an intermittent "memory leak".  I am running the current version (4.12.20.3) and after an hour of processing 5DS R files this morning, task manager shows its memory usage had grown to over 5 gigs of memory.  The workstation I am using has 128 GB per processor installed so even though total memory utilized by DPP and the other programs running is under 5% of available memory, DPP gets extremely sluggish as it gobbles up memory and needs to be exited and restarted to return to normal speed.

GPU utilization by DPP is insignificant with GPU loading never going over 3% and almost all of that load is from Win 10 (Desktop Windows Manager and Client Server Runtime Process).

DPP does most of what I need and it is simple and straightforward to use but the code definitely needs some much overdue maintenance.

Rodger

[Waddizzle]

"Seeing both screencaps, for me this supports my view on how this is supposed to work.

With 'low-end' videocard the GPU is only used for 'speed up preview display', as shown in the bottom screencap.

With a more powerfull videocard the option for using GPU for "image processing" comes available (upper screencap).

Which also means in DPP this is not working as intended, because GPU option ON or OFF has no effect, not even with a very powerfull videocard."

---------------------------------------

That is a pretty strong statement.

I think that we all agree that this part of the user interface is not well designed.  I think someone may have originally intended to have multiple selections like this.  No offense, but how you think it should work is not a currently available option.

The box that you currently see would have made more sense had it look similar to this, but with multiple sub items with their own checkboxes.  The top most box in each section selects all options.  The individual options can be individually enabled or disabled.