A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Will a new computer help?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 20th 12, 12:10 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Alan Justice
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default Will a new computer help?

I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW: 16
MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more shots.)
I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon software
that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010). It takes about 2 minutes to
load 1000 images into the display when I click on the folder. This makes it
impractical to go back and forth between different folders. To best evaluate
images I display most of them full screen. It takes over 3 sec to load a
single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just waiting, assuming I
only want to look at each full frame once.

Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware will
help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?

I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I don't
know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer anyway.

I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.

--
Alan Justice
http://home.earthlink.net/~wildlifepaparazzi/


  #2  
Old February 20th 12, 01:05 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Will a new computer help?

On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:10:55 -0800, "Alan Justice"
wrote:

I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW: 16
MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more shots.)
I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon software
that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010). It takes about 2 minutes to
load 1000 images into the display when I click on the folder. This makes it
impractical to go back and forth between different folders. To best evaluate
images I display most of them full screen. It takes over 3 sec to load a
single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just waiting, assuming I
only want to look at each full frame once.

Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware will
help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?

I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I don't
know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer anyway.

I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.


By modern standards your computer is V E R Y S L O W.

I had a computer to your general specs about 10 years ago (except that
it the faster DDR memory). I now have a Dell with a 2.9GHz -7
processor and 8Gb of DDR3 Ram. This is immeasurably faster than my old
machine. Tasks which used to let me go and have lunch now happen in
less than a second. You need a new computer.

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #3  
Old February 20th 12, 01:56 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
K W Hart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 142
Default Will a new computer help?


"Alan Justice" wrote in message
m...
I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW: 16
MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more
shots.)
I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon
software
that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010). It takes about 2 minutes
to
load 1000 images into the display when I click on the folder. This makes
it
impractical to go back and forth between different folders. To best
evaluate
images I display most of them full screen. It takes over 3 sec to load a
single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just waiting, assuming
I
only want to look at each full frame once.

Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware will
help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?

I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I
don't
know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer anyway.

I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.

--
Alan Justice
http://home.earthlink.net/~wildlifepaparazzi/



Generally, adding RAM improves speed. When the computer needs more RAM than
it has, it uses the hard drive as virtual RAM. The hard drive is incredibly
slower than actual RAM- relatively speaking.
You could also bring up the Task Manager (CTRL+ALT+DEL) and see how many
programs are running at the same time. If you have a bunch of background
stuff running, that will slow down your computer. Along that line, here's a
very risky possibility: turn off your anti-virus while editting. If you do
this, I would physically disconnect the computer from the outside world.
Anti-virus software looks at every file you open and compares the contents
to a database of known problems.

But, here's a really wild possible solution: take fewer photos by making
sure that each photo will be good before you fire the shutter. Less time
spent editting. If I had 100's of image after a shoot, it would have been a
very long session. And a very long session ahead in the darkroom.


--
Ken Hart



  #4  
Old February 20th 12, 02:00 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Robert Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,901
Default Will a new computer help?

On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:10:55 -0800, "Alan Justice"
wrote:
: I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW: 16
: MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more shots.)
: I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon software
: that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010).

I assume you're talking about Digital Photo Professional. The current version
is 3.11.4.10. You may want to get the latest "software updater" from the Canon
site and install it.

: It takes about 2 minutes to load 1000 images into the display when I click
: on the folder. This makes it impractical to go back and forth between
: different folders.

I assume you're talking about folders in the computer and not folders on the
CF card. Constantly referring to the card would slow you down considerably.

I assume also that when you refer to the "display", you mean the "Edit Image
Window". 1000 images is a pretty large number for DPP to handle that way,
especially since your RAW files are pretty big. So don't try to bring them all
up at the same time. One way to keep track of them more efficiently might be
to create subfolders for different parts of the shoot. (You can create them
from within DPP or in Windows Explorer.)

: To best evaluate images I display most of them full screen. It takes over
: 3 sec to load a single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just
: waiting, assuming I only want to look at each full frame once.

You won't notice it as much if you don't bring them into the Edit Image Window
as full screen, but instead blow each one up as needed. (I think you may mean
"100% view" instead of "full screen", but I think the effect is the same
either way.)

: Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware will
: help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?

RAM, I think, although 2GB should be enough if you're not running a lot of
other software at the same time. A faster computer might help a little, but I
really suspect that your problem is the time it takes DPP to establish the
Edit Image Window, so try the suggestions above first.

: I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I don't
: know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer anyway.

Depends on the hardware configuration and the availability of free slots in
the case. Without seeing your machine, I can't advise you sensibly.

If you do get a new (Windows) computer, it will be Windows 7, rather than XP.
You may be tempted to get the 64-bit version, since that takes better
advantage of the computer's CPU speed. But there's no 64-bit version of DPP,
so it won't run any faster under the 64-bit OS than under the 32-bit version.
Also, I've had some problems running DPP on one of my 64-bit computers.
Without going into gory detail, I think it's unlikely that you'd encounter
those problems, but AFAIK they never occur with the 32-bit OS.

: I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.

I guess that's pretty much what I use at home (an Optiplex GX-620), although I
run Windows Server 2003 rather than XP. At work I have DPP installed on
several computers of various speeds (I'm a computer system manager), but
haven't noticed much of a performance difference among them.

Bob
  #5  
Old February 20th 12, 03:52 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 210
Default Will a new computer help?

On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:10:55 -0800, "Alan Justice"
wrote:

I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW: 16
MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more shots.)
I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon software
that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010). It takes about 2 minutes to
load 1000 images into the display when I click on the folder. This makes it
impractical to go back and forth between different folders. To best evaluate
images I display most of them full screen. It takes over 3 sec to load a
single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just waiting, assuming I
only want to look at each full frame once.

Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware will
help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?

I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I don't
know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer anyway.

I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.



At the present time, your biggest problem is the software, and the way you use
your (slow) machine.

One of my computers is almost the exact same as yours, and in order to speed
things up, I don't use "camera software" to review images, since it is very
slow.

I also either shoot in RAW + JPEG, or create JPEGs of my RAW files, and use them
as "models". I keep the jpegs in one set of folders, and the raw in another. I
also limit folders to about 300 or less RAW files since Windows XP gets bogged
down by them..

To look through my jpeg photos, I use irfanview, and I also use that to create
thumnails of all of my photos. I also use Centico Photo Album to keep track of
things. (but I'm way behind!)

With folders of jpegs and Irfanview, I can review full screen shots at 1 per
second or faster. With another computer I usually use, I can review 10 per
second.

Once I determine what is a possible 'good' photo, I load its raw version (or
DNG) into my edit software. (I also create Adobe Negatives)

I have several cameras (Nikons Panasonics, Sonys and others) and several editing
programs (Micrografx, Adobe CS, Elements, Nikonview, Sony, RawTheropy and lots
of others.) With all of this 'confusion' I find it best to use Windows views of
jpegs and irfanview to find things.

OK... when you get a new computer, remember desktops are faster than laptops. I
plan on getting an Intel i7 CPU machine. Also get a good graphics card since
modern cards can support the CPU in processing graphics. Don't worry about ram,
machines today come with oodles of it! Some have 12 G and I can't see a possible
use for it! (at least for still photography)

For backup drives, I use external drives rated for travel, and limited to 500G
or 1T each, I feel this is more reliable. I keep everything on 2 or more
external drives and on 2 or more internal different computers, plus DVDRs. I
also have a DVDR set off site. Sometimes I have 5T plugged into one machine!

As for XP, it can't even use the 2G ram you have so don't worry about that. (Use
ctrl-alt-del to check on your ram use.) Your new machine should have Win 7 Pro.
(Or get an Apple!)

Compared to what you have now, a new machine is going to be lightning fast!

  #6  
Old February 20th 12, 04:22 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Will a new computer help?

On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:00:32 -0500, Robert Coe wrote:

On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:10:55 -0800, "Alan Justice"
wrote:
: I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW: 16
: MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more shots.)
: I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon software
: that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010).

I assume you're talking about Digital Photo Professional. The current version
is 3.11.4.10. You may want to get the latest "software updater" from the Canon
site and install it.

: It takes about 2 minutes to load 1000 images into the display when I click
: on the folder. This makes it impractical to go back and forth between
: different folders.

I assume you're talking about folders in the computer and not folders on the
CF card. Constantly referring to the card would slow you down considerably.

I assume also that when you refer to the "display", you mean the "Edit Image
Window". 1000 images is a pretty large number for DPP to handle that way,
especially since your RAW files are pretty big. So don't try to bring them all
up at the same time. One way to keep track of them more efficiently might be
to create subfolders for different parts of the shoot. (You can create them
from within DPP or in Windows Explorer.)

: To best evaluate images I display most of them full screen. It takes over
: 3 sec to load a single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just
: waiting, assuming I only want to look at each full frame once.

You won't notice it as much if you don't bring them into the Edit Image Window
as full screen, but instead blow each one up as needed. (I think you may mean
"100% view" instead of "full screen", but I think the effect is the same
either way.)

: Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware will
: help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?

RAM, I think, although 2GB should be enough if you're not running a lot of
other software at the same time. A faster computer might help a little, but I
really suspect that your problem is the time it takes DPP to establish the
Edit Image Window, so try the suggestions above first.

: I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I don't
: know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer anyway.

Depends on the hardware configuration and the availability of free slots in
the case. Without seeing your machine, I can't advise you sensibly.

If you do get a new (Windows) computer, it will be Windows 7, rather than XP.
You may be tempted to get the 64-bit version, since that takes better
advantage of the computer's CPU speed. But there's no 64-bit version of DPP,
so it won't run any faster under the 64-bit OS than under the 32-bit version.
Also, I've had some problems running DPP on one of my 64-bit computers.
Without going into gory detail, I think it's unlikely that you'd encounter
those problems, but AFAIK they never occur with the 32-bit OS.

: I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.

I guess that's pretty much what I use at home (an Optiplex GX-620), although I
run Windows Server 2003 rather than XP. At work I have DPP installed on
several computers of various speeds (I'm a computer system manager), but
haven't noticed much of a performance difference among them.

Bob


Are you really running SDRAM?

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #7  
Old February 20th 12, 05:47 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Robert Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,901
Default Will a new computer help?

On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 16:22:04 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:
: On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:00:32 -0500, Robert Coe wrote:
:
: On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:10:55 -0800, "Alan Justice"
: wrote:
: : I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW: 16
: : MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more shots.)
: : I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon software
: : that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010).
:
: I assume you're talking about Digital Photo Professional. The current version
: is 3.11.4.10. You may want to get the latest "software updater" from the Canon
: site and install it.
:
: : It takes about 2 minutes to load 1000 images into the display when I click
: : on the folder. This makes it impractical to go back and forth between
: : different folders.
:
: I assume you're talking about folders in the computer and not folders on the
: CF card. Constantly referring to the card would slow you down considerably.
:
: I assume also that when you refer to the "display", you mean the "Edit Image
: Window". 1000 images is a pretty large number for DPP to handle that way,
: especially since your RAW files are pretty big. So don't try to bring them all
: up at the same time. One way to keep track of them more efficiently might be
: to create subfolders for different parts of the shoot. (You can create them
: from within DPP or in Windows Explorer.)
:
: : To best evaluate images I display most of them full screen. It takes over
: : 3 sec to load a single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just
: : waiting, assuming I only want to look at each full frame once.
:
: You won't notice it as much if you don't bring them into the Edit Image Window
: as full screen, but instead blow each one up as needed. (I think you may mean
: "100% view" instead of "full screen", but I think the effect is the same
: either way.)
:
: : Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware will
: : help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?
:
: RAM, I think, although 2GB should be enough if you're not running a lot of
: other software at the same time. A faster computer might help a little, but I
: really suspect that your problem is the time it takes DPP to establish the
: Edit Image Window, so try the suggestions above first.
:
: : I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I don't
: : know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer anyway.
:
: Depends on the hardware configuration and the availability of free slots in
: the case. Without seeing your machine, I can't advise you sensibly.
:
: If you do get a new (Windows) computer, it will be Windows 7, rather than XP.
: You may be tempted to get the 64-bit version, since that takes better
: advantage of the computer's CPU speed. But there's no 64-bit version of DPP,
: so it won't run any faster under the 64-bit OS than under the 32-bit version.
: Also, I've had some problems running DPP on one of my 64-bit computers.
: Without going into gory detail, I think it's unlikely that you'd encounter
: those problems, but AFAIK they never occur with the 32-bit OS.
:
: : I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.
:
: I guess that's pretty much what I use at home (an Optiplex GX-620), although I
: run Windows Server 2003 rather than XP. At work I have DPP installed on
: several computers of various speeds (I'm a computer system manager), but
: haven't noticed much of a performance difference among them.
:
: Bob
:
: Are you really running SDRAM?

No, I don't think so; my home computer is pretty old. In fact, I've got a
brand new one waiting to be installed as soon as I can find the time.

At work I have a couple of Optiplex 755's and an assortment of older machines.
I'm not much hung up on speed, since most of what I do doesn't require it. So
more than half of my computers are old machines that I resurrected and nobody
else really wanted. You may recall from another thread that the most recent
new equipment the company bought me was a Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II telephoto
lens. ;^)

But the bottom line of may article is that I suspect that the OP's problems
probably stem from the sub-optimal way he's using the DPP photo editor and
not, as one or two responders apparently think, that his computer isn't fast
enough.

Bob
  #8  
Old February 20th 12, 07:05 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Alan Justice
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default Will a new computer help?

"Eric Stevens" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:10:55 -0800, "Alan Justice"
wrote:

I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW:

16
MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more

shots.)
I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon

software
that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010). It takes about 2 minutes

to
load 1000 images into the display when I click on the folder. This makes

it
impractical to go back and forth between different folders. To best

evaluate
images I display most of them full screen. It takes over 3 sec to load a
single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just waiting, assuming

I
only want to look at each full frame once.

Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware

will
help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?

I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I

don't
know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer

anyway.

I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.


By modern standards your computer is V E R Y S L O W.

I had a computer to your general specs about 10 years ago (except that
it the faster DDR memory). I now have a Dell with a 2.9GHz -7
processor and 8Gb of DDR3 Ram. This is immeasurably faster than my old
machine. Tasks which used to let me go and have lunch now happen in
less than a second. You need a new computer.

Regards,

Eric Stevens


So why is your 2.9 GHz much faster than my 2.8? Is it the additional RAM (8
GB vs 2), or is it the type of RAM? (SDRAM vs DDR3 - what's the
difference?)


  #9  
Old February 20th 12, 07:14 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Alan Justice
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default Will a new computer help?

"K W Hart" wrote in message
...

"Alan Justice" wrote in message
m...
I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW:

16
MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more
shots.)
I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon
software
that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010). It takes about 2

minutes
to
load 1000 images into the display when I click on the folder. This

makes
it
impractical to go back and forth between different folders. To best
evaluate
images I display most of them full screen. It takes over 3 sec to load

a
single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just waiting,

assuming
I
only want to look at each full frame once.

Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware

will
help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?

I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I
don't
know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer

anyway.

I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.

--
Alan Justice
http://home.earthlink.net/~wildlifepaparazzi/



Generally, adding RAM improves speed. When the computer needs more RAM

than
it has, it uses the hard drive as virtual RAM. The hard drive is

incredibly
slower than actual RAM- relatively speaking.
You could also bring up the Task Manager (CTRL+ALT+DEL) and see how many
programs are running at the same time. If you have a bunch of background
stuff running, that will slow down your computer. Along that line, here's

a
very risky possibility: turn off your anti-virus while editting. If you do
this, I would physically disconnect the computer from the outside world.
Anti-virus software looks at every file you open and compares the contents
to a database of known problems.

But, here's a really wild possible solution: take fewer photos by making
sure that each photo will be good before you fire the shutter. Less time
spent editting. If I had 100's of image after a shoot, it would have been

a
very long session. And a very long session ahead in the darkroom.


--
Ken Hart



In the Task Manager there are 40 Processes running. I have no idea what
most of them are, so I don't know if I can turn them off. PhotoShop takes
up 10x more mamory than any other one listed. I have not seen a difference
in DPP when I shut it down. This computer is not online, so I trust
anti-virus software is not running.

Most of those 100's of shots are wildlife in action. I have to just hold
down the shutter button and hope that one of them is a winner. And with
shifting light, I bracket (3 or 5). I'd rather spend more time editing if
it means getting the shot.

Thanks for your comments.


  #10  
Old February 20th 12, 07:20 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Alan Justice
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default Will a new computer help?

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:10:55 -0800, "Alan Justice"


wrote:
: I have recently started editing digital files and it is very slow (RAW:

16
: MP, 24 MB). (Slides were slow too, but now I end up with many more

shots.)
: I have many hundreds of images to edit after a shoot. I use Canon

software
: that came with the 1D Mk4 (ver. 3.8.1.0, 2010).

I assume you're talking about Digital Photo Professional. The current

version
is 3.11.4.10. You may want to get the latest "software updater" from the

Canon
site and install it.

: It takes about 2 minutes to load 1000 images into the display when I

click
: on the folder. This makes it impractical to go back and forth between
: different folders.

I assume you're talking about folders in the computer and not folders on

the
CF card. Constantly referring to the card would slow you down

considerably.

I assume also that when you refer to the "display", you mean the "Edit

Image
Window". 1000 images is a pretty large number for DPP to handle that way,
especially since your RAW files are pretty big. So don't try to bring them

all
up at the same time. One way to keep track of them more efficiently might

be
to create subfolders for different parts of the shoot. (You can create

them
from within DPP or in Windows Explorer.)

: To best evaluate images I display most of them full screen. It takes

over
: 3 sec to load a single picture to full frame. That's about 1 hour just
: waiting, assuming I only want to look at each full frame once.

You won't notice it as much if you don't bring them into the Edit Image

Window
as full screen, but instead blow each one up as needed. (I think you may

mean
"100% view" instead of "full screen", but I think the effect is the same
either way.)

: Is my computer the slow part, the software, or what? And if hardware

will
: help, should I worry more about processor speed or RAM?

RAM, I think, although 2GB should be enough if you're not running a lot of
other software at the same time. A faster computer might help a little,

but I
really suspect that your problem is the time it takes DPP to establish the
Edit Image Window, so try the suggestions above first.

: I also need another 2 TB of disk space and the same for backup, and I

don't
: know if this computer will handle it, so I may need a new computer

anyway.

Depends on the hardware configuration and the availability of free slots

in
the case. Without seeing your machine, I can't advise you sensibly.

If you do get a new (Windows) computer, it will be Windows 7, rather than

XP.
You may be tempted to get the 64-bit version, since that takes better
advantage of the computer's CPU speed. But there's no 64-bit version of

DPP,
so it won't run any faster under the 64-bit OS than under the 32-bit

version.
Also, I've had some problems running DPP on one of my 64-bit computers.
Without going into gory detail, I think it's unlikely that you'd encounter
those problems, but AFAIK they never occur with the 32-bit OS.

: I have a Dell with Pentium 4 Processor, 2.8 GHz with 2 GB SDRAM, Win XP.

I guess that's pretty much what I use at home (an Optiplex GX-620),

although I
run Windows Server 2003 rather than XP. At work I have DPP installed on
several computers of various speeds (I'm a computer system manager), but
haven't noticed much of a performance difference among them.

Bob


I found that whether I have 1 or 1000 images in a folder, it still takes
over 3 sec to load a single one at full frame. I double click the thumbnail
and it's full frame. Then I will CTRL-1 or CTRL-2 to see it closer up when
needed. The latter part is not as slow as the initial full frame.

Thanks for comments.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Computer Irby Digital Photography 194 March 19th 07 01:38 PM
Computer?? jd Digital Photography 46 October 23rd 06 10:58 AM
For the computer geeks.... secheese Digital Photography 1 January 12th 05 04:05 AM
2 Scanners To One Computer HRosita Digital Photography 5 January 10th 05 10:38 PM
2 Scanners To One Computer Tim Forehand Digital Photography 16 January 10th 05 03:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.