xirja
![]() |
The attached file shows that a scale to a blend can increase the time by 10x
![]() Scale Bug.ffxml _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: November 22, 2013 10:23 pm | ||||
xirja
![]() |
Didn't have time to diagnose the problem the other day, but it is not a scale issue, but an image issue.
Curious why a flip operation will cause this increase in time with an image? Or rotate .25,.5,.75. Image Bug.ffxml _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: November 24, 2013 2:24 pm | ||||
xirja
![]() |
Am I misunderstanding image handling or is this an issue?
_____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: December 3, 2013 8:11 am | ||||
GMM
Moderator
Posts: 3491 |
Can anyone with a Mac confirm this? I'm afraid out testers are too busy with more critical bugs.
|
|||
Posted: December 3, 2013 8:23 am | ||||
xirja
![]() |
It may not be a mac only issue and the title here should probably be changed to 'Image processing'.
Also it is not version specific, I tested it on FF 2.012, and there is the same problem: Image Bug v2.ffxml _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: December 4, 2013 10:25 am | ||||
xirja
![]() |
So here are some screen captures and more details.
Regarding the 1st and the 6th Selector position ( in Image Bug.ffxml ), the Scale 1 and Flip XY: ![]() _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: December 4, 2013 10:30 am | ||||
xirja
![]() |
Selector 1 ( Scale 1 ) timing is:
![]() _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: December 4, 2013 10:32 am | ||||
xirja
![]() |
Selector 6 ( Flip XY ) timing is:
![]() _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: December 4, 2013 10:33 am | ||||
xirja
![]() |
When the Noise / Image switch is flipped to Noise, there is no appreciable timing difference between Selector 1 and 6.
I would almost understand this if it was bitmap based and not sample based architecture, but for the mean time, another... ![]() _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: December 4, 2013 10:37 am | ||||
Indigo Ray
![]() |
I'm using FF4.006 on Windows 7 and I do not confirm this. "Flip" barely increases render time. So it could be a Mac bug.
|
|||
Posted: December 4, 2013 8:15 pm | ||||
xirja
![]() |
Thanks for checking this. I came up with the following table of times on 3 machines using Image Bug.ffxml in FF4.006:
Windows XP 2.6 Ghz single core Image, Selector 1: 4.58 Image, Selector 6: 9.68 Mac G4 10.4 1 Ghz single core Image, Selector 1: 9.42 Image, Selector 6: 11.35 Mac Intel 10.6 2.8 Ghz quad core Image, Selector 1: 0.65 Image, Selector 6: 8.22 Might it be the parallel processing somehow to blame in the last case? But still, seeing roughly double for Win XP? _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: December 5, 2013 8:42 am | ||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
I have tested this and I have the following result
Using Windows 8 64 bit (just installed with a total fresh start) and the latest FF 4.0.6 with the silent update using Intel Quad Core i7 2600K 3.4GHz Using Image Bug filter with Noise/Image checkbox enabled Image, Selector 1: 0,37 seconds Image, Selector 6: 1,15 seconds Using Image Bug V2 filter 600x600 with image noise checkbox disabled Fast/10x Slow checkbox enabled 1,42 seconds Fast/10x Slow checkbox disabled 0,38 seconds --------------------------------------- 600x600 with image noise checkbox enabled Fast/10x Slow checkbox enabled 0,52 seconds Fast/10x Slow checkbox disabled 0,47 seconds --------------------------------------------- |
|||
Posted: December 12, 2013 4:09 am | ||||
xirja
![]() |
Roughly 2x again, thanks for confirming.
Not that this is a huge issue, but it would be helpful to understand why this is. A tiler I'm working on suffers. ![]() _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: December 12, 2013 9:05 am | ||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
0,37 x 3 = 1,11 so I think is more than 3x instead of roughly 2x ![]() |
|||
Posted: December 12, 2013 4:34 pm | ||||
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator |
Indeed, any Transform component with non-zero sample coordinate distortion adds extra rendering time (about a double on my Windows 7 machine).
My bet is on sample cache. Having any distortion invalidates the sample cache, so your image-providing subtree gets sampled twice, instead of being sampled once with the second sample from Blend being retrieved from the sample cache. Try to replace Blend with a switch or anything else that fires one sample instead of two, and you'll see what I mean. |
|||
Posted: February 25, 2014 10:09 am | ||||
xirja
![]() |
I think I almost understand, especially if the difference is double the time, or the sum of the two independent processes, but still here FF 4.008 on a Mac Intel 10.6 2.8 Ghz quad core:
Image, Selector 1: 0.65 seconds Image, Selector 6: 8.22 seconds = 13 x and replacing the blend with a 50% threshold at 0 smoothing : Image, Selector 1: 0.55 seconds Image, Selector 6: 3.03 seconds = 6 x _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: February 25, 2014 11:54 am | ||||
xirja
![]() |
So, 13 or 6 times more time depending.
_____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: March 12, 2014 5:35 pm | ||||
xirja
![]() |
My apologies for continuing this gripe, but the inexplicable is tormenting me!
Again, for a "Flip" transform it takes greater than 8 x the render time WHEN THE SOURCE IS AN IMAGE on a mac multi-core!!!???. PREPOSTEROUS! What is this? I mean for god's sake, replacing the Flip with a Blur (Gaussian) at 100 takes almost half the time???!!! So what is sooo peculiar about the Transform components and Images here? Image Bug Simplified.ffxml _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: May 10, 2014 4:12 pm | ||||
xirja
![]() |
Aha, it seems the blur set to .000001 is the work around!
But still perplexed! Image Bug Solved_.ffxml _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: May 10, 2014 4:30 pm |
Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!
33,711 Registered Users
+18 new in 30 days!
153,531 Posts
+39 new in 30 days!
15,347 Topics
+72 new in year!
22 unregistered users.