Camera Raw 6.1pre - scrolling performance worse than in CR6 for me

Hi
I like the quality of the new processing in CR6, but the performance is much worse than in CS4/CR5.x. This is especially annoying when you try to scroll in a Raw file using the hand-tool. But then I saw the 6.1 prerelease announced containing "performance enhancements designed to improve the responsiveness of the controls and the scrolling mechanism relative to Camera Raw 6.0". Happily I immediately decided to give the new prerelease a try...
But unfortunately I don't see a performance gain when scrolling in CR6.1pre. It is actually worse for me in 6.1 than it was in 6.0. It is now almost impossible to scroll out to the corners of a Raw file using the hand-tool. It fells like it get stuck. And I know never know if I have actually have reached a corner or it is just stuck somewhere on the way out to it. So now if I want to go to a corner, I find it much easier to zoom out by double clicking the hand, and then zoom into the corner by clicking the magnify tool in the corner.
But the new lens correction is great ! :-)
Win XP Pro x64 Edition.
/Stig

Stig N wrote:
If you double-click you open CR hosted by Photoshop, ie. 64 bit (Or at least that is the default, you might be able to change it in the settings). But if you right-click a raw file in Bridge and choose "Open in Camera Raw" it is hosted by Bridge.
Oh? Was not aware of this; and, come to think of it, I cannot see the reasoning behind not always opening in the faster/better mode.
Or am I missing something?

Similar Messages

Hello, I have a Mac computer with NVIDIA 750M dedicated graphics card and monitor EIZO but the problem was there when I was working with Windows and Acer monitor. When I open a file from Camera Raw in PS this is smaller than the screen so I double-click w

Hello, I have a Mac computer with NVIDIA 750M dedicated graphics card and monitor EIZO but the problem was there when I was working with Windows and Acer monitor. When I open a file from Camera Raw in PS this is smaller than the screen so I double-click with the tool "hand" to fit on the screen, but the picture loses sharpness and becomes blurry. If you magnify the image even only slightly with the tool "zoom" the picture comes back clear. In Camera Raw instead is always sharp. I solve the problem by turning off the graphics card in PS but often use plugin that need the graphics card otherwise the processing time is much longer. I ask for help.
Thanks.

Hello, I have a Mac computer with NVIDIA 750M dedicated graphics card and monitor EIZO but the problem was there when I was working with Windows and Acer monitor. When I open a file from Camera Raw in PS this is smaller than the screen so I double-click with the tool "hand" to fit on the screen, but the picture loses sharpness and becomes blurry. If you magnify the image even only slightly with the tool "zoom" the picture comes back clear. In Camera Raw instead is always sharp. I solve the problem by turning off the graphics card in PS but often use plugin that need the graphics card otherwise the processing time is much longer. I ask for help.
Thanks.

MSI 8800gts performing worse than my friends 8600gt

I have a 8800gts 320 with a anthlon 6000+, 2 gigs of RAM, 610w power supply.. and in cod4 Im getting FPS drops while my friend is sitting next to me running smoothly on a 8600gt 256 and anthlon x2 4200+ 2 gigs of RAM.. Im positive my setup should be running better than his, and I have the latest drivers, 6 pin is plugged in.
I took off antialiasing and my frame drops went away, so it seems like theres more of a load on my vid card than there should be.

Quote from: Karst on 22-January-13, 06:58:50
Mobo - EVGA 780i Sli Nforce
CPU - Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Wolfgang 3.0ghz (with aftermarket heatsink)
Ram - 4GB DDR2 Gskill 1066
Here is my problem, the MSI 660 Ti is performing the same, or worse, than my 260 GTX.
GTX 660 does not fit with your 6 years old config.
Your mainboard, processor and RAM are a bottleneck for your GPU.
Nforce 780i - released 6 years ago
Core 2 Duo E8400 - released 5 years ago
Gskill DDR2-1066 - overvolted DDR2-800 modules, released 7 years ago.

Adobe Camera Raw has a bigger picture ratio than the original Canon CR2?

This one is processed by the Adobe Camera Raw:
this is the JPG processed by the Canon camera:
When I view the CR2 files in Canon software, it shows the same as the 2nd JPG posted above. However, when CR2 files were in Adobe Camera Raw, all the photos are slightly enlarged, I did not apply any lens profile correction, how to fix this problem?
Thanks

Look at the bottom of the Lens Corrections - Profile tab and see the notification about built-in lens corrections being applied, then click on the and see exactly what those corrections are:
Without any lens corrections the G1X2 has severe distortion:
Both Canon and Adobe are doing lens corrections and there must be slightly different math involved so the corrections aren't exactly the same.

How do I get Adobe Photoshop 5.1 to successfully install the 6.7 Camera Raw update? I keep getting error code U44M1l210 (for any of my CS5.5 updates_

does anyone know? Adobe just told me they don't support 5.5 or 6 through phone or chat. (and I thought time warner customer service was bad)
I'm on a mac, 10.6.8 snow leopard.
Other than this camera raw update not working, everything else is working fine.
thanks for any help.
Dave Wofford
Horse & Buggy Press

I am not sure that you will be able to. XP-64 was never supported in any version of PrPro. Some got later versions to run, but most usually had some issues.
You might do some research on DirectX, to see which versions were supported by XP-64. That OS, though providing beta-testing for 64-bit OS's to come, was essentially an evolutionary dead-end. It was completely replaced with Vista-64. Again, some users had issues with Vista-64 and later versions of PrPro, than yours. You might have better luck, trying Win7-64, but that is just a guess.
Good luck,
Hunt

Camera Raw 6.5 will not install on PSE 9 for Mac OS

Every time I try to install the Camera Raw update 6.5 into Elements 9 Editor, I get the messages "Some updates failed to install." and "Update is not applicable." The version of the Camera Raw Plug-in I have is "6.4.1.145" and will not work with my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150. Any ideas?

Install Camera Raw 6.5 plug-in for Photoshop Elements 9 or 10 and Adobe Premiere Elements 9 or 10 (manual installation on Mac OS or Windows)
Note: To successfully install the Camera Raw Plug-in for Photoshop Elements and Adobe Premiere Elements, follow all of the instructions below.
Download the update installer utility (Windows: ElementsCameraRaw-6.5-mul-AdobeUpdate.zip or Mac: ElementsCameraRaw-6.5-mul-AdobeUpdate.dmg) using the following links.
NOTE: Elements 9 and Elements 10 products use a different version of the Camera Raw 6.5 plug-in, select the link related to your version.
Camera Raw 6.5 for Photoshop Elements 9 &and Adobe Premiere Elements 9
Windows: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5264
Mac OS: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5263
Hope it helps. For more info check here http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/install-camera-raw-6-5.html

Photoshop cs5 camera raw (what?) Not 5.7 or better thats for sure.

I was a bit dissapointed today when I downloaded cs5 photoshop trial, and tried to open a canon t2i raw file.
Aaarg..."Document could not be opened".
Is there an update to the shiny new CS5 Photoshop that would install the current camera raw?

jwestveer wrote:
ACR has changed between 5.7 and 6.0 and that camera is no longer supported.
No, ACR hasn't "changed"...the fact is that because of QE, packaging and other Creative Suite requirements, Camera Raw 6 (the one that ships WITH CS5) is already out of date...ACR 6 was done months ago. ACR 5.7 was literally just released a week or so ago and has camera support ACR 6 doesn't have.
John Nack has already indicated there will be an update to ACR to version 6.1 which include all the cameras that 5.7 support (like the 550) and any new cameras that they were able to support.
The EXACT same situation occurred last time with CS4. Photoshop CS4 was released with ACR version 5.0 which didn't support all the cameras that ACR 4.6 supported even though they were released almost the same time. It wasn't long until ACR 5.1 came out.
In the mean time, DNG Converter 5.7 WILL convert the 550 CR2s to DNGs that ACR 6 can read...
And ALL of this camera support bullcrap would be moot if Nikon and Canon quite using proprietary raw file formats instead of a standard.

IPhoto 6.0.3 (293) Performance Worse Than Any Other Version

Interesting. I have 9,990 photos and my iPhoto 6 just came to a crawl. I have 1.5GB of memory. Something is definitely wrong. When I start iPhoto it appears to behave normally for about 30 seconds.
I've read many of the other speed/performance/slow threads in this forum. Here's what I've tried:
I have all my Rolls collapsed. After doing a couple transactions (eg: scrolling up/down or editing one picture), iPhoto freezes.
When this happens I'll open Activity Monitor and find my dual CPUs pegged at about 97%.
I've rebuilt my library, my small thumbnails, my large thumbnails, loaded IPLM (iPhoto Library Manager) and rebuilt the library using its copy function, and I've even moved my library to another volume. Nothing has worked. I've even run Disk Warrior against my volume that hosts iPhoto, reset permissions and run Disk Utility and verified that the hard drive is OK. I've also removed my iPhoto preference file. Nothing has helped.
I'm beside myself.
I'm currently running a manual rebuild test (UGGGH!!!!!) to see it's a problem with my existing library's data (i.e. corruption?) or my instance of iPhoto.
(NOTE: a smaller, newer library helps but I don't want to lose my meta data. That's, frankly, the most important feature of iPhoto for my wife and me.)
I've never heard the fans on my Dual G4 PPC (mirror door model) run so loudly. Of course, I've rebooted several times too.
If anyone has any other suggestions, please let me know. I have a backup but I feer the backup contains the same, assumed, corrupt files as my active volume.
Dual 1.25GHz G4 PowerPC Mac OS X (10.4.6)

G4Monster:
Have you tried rebuilding the library with iPLM and it's File->Rebuild Library... menu option? That create a new, library, copying the files and rebuilding the database, etc.? Or is that what you meant by "using its copy function,"?
If you find you have to create new libraries in the end, there is a way to preserve the comments and keywords. See Tutorial #1 on how to preserve them.

Anyone else haveing issues where Motion 5 performs worse than Motion 4?

I'm having an issue where even simple particle emitters playback slowly. I can create the same simple effect in 4 and it plays back in real time.
I even saved a test file in 4 (which ran real time), and when I open it in 5 it plays back slower. What gives?

I´m having a strange issues with Motion 5 performance:
In my iMac 2010 (i3 @ 3,06 ghz, Radeon 4670 256 mb and 8 gb) Motion 5 is about 20-25% faster than Motion 4.
For example, when rendering the PulseHD Open Motion 4 takes 2:30 mins and Motion 5 takes 2:00 mins.
The strange results come from my Macbook Pro 2010 (i5 @ 2,4 ghz, Geforce GT 330m and 8 gb also):
With the same template this computer takes 3:20 mins in Motion 4 and about 6:30 mins in Motion 5!!!! So near the double.
Even more strange: if I make a ram preview in Motion 5 with this same template and settings that I used in the final render it only takes 2:51 mins and Motion 4 is slower, because it takes 3:25 mins!!!!!!
I forgot to say that in all the cases the render quality was set to normal and motion blur was turned on with 8 samples.
So, it´s clear that Motion 5 needs an update as does FCP X, because in my computers it crashes a lot.

CS3 Bridge. OSX, after camera raw update- no scroll bar...

Half the contents of a directory run off the screen with no scroll bars. I only noticed because the last photo to the far right was cut in half. I select that photo, press right over and over- it selected 10 invisible photos before it ran over to the second row.

What EXACT version of Bridge? 2.1.1.9? What EXACT version of the OS? 10.5.2 or 10.4.11?
What have you tried to fix it so far? What routine maintenance do you perform on your machine?

E3000 firmware 1.0.03 performance worse than 1.0.02

I upgraded to 1.0.03 last night and the performance is worse over the 5ghz band on my Linksys Media Extender. On Monday I could watch HDTV over the network. I upgraded last night to 1.0.03 and now I get network problems and dropped frames. The signal went from about 75% to 50%. I'd really like to get 1.0.02 back on there. Any way to get it?

I think it is not possible to downgrade the firmware as the old firmware is not available on the website.
Try changing the wireless settings on the router.
Open the setup page of the router. Click on Wireless tab. Change the SSID for 5 GHz wireless band. Change the channel width to 40 MHz only and channel to 161-5.5805 GHz.
Do not change the SSID of 2.4 GHz wireless signal otherwise the Cisco connect software will stop working.
Keep the Network mode on Mixed for both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz wireless band. Save the settings. Click on Wireless security sub tab. Set the security mode to WPA/WPA2 mixed mode and note down the password of wireless network.
Click on wireless MAC filter sub tab and make sure that it is disabled.
Click on Advanced wireless settings sub tab. Change the Beacon interval to 75, RTS threshold to 2307 and fragmentation threshold to 2306. Save the settings. Save the settings.
Go to the Administration tab and disable the UPnP.
See if that works.

Infinity HH3 wireless performance - worse than HH1...

Back in May we signed up for the 6 month free Infinity trial.
Whilst wireless speeds in the room in which the hub is placed are OK (approx 30-35mbps), speeds throughout the rest of the house are much lower.
We have a TV with wireless connection on which we want to watch using iPlayer. We have also tried the Wii and PS3. iPlayer worked fine (on standard resolution - no chance on HD!) when we had the HH1, but with the HH3 we get buffering and interruptions even on low resolution. Speedtest on a tablet next to the TV shows speeds of less than 1 up to about 8, yet even when the higher speeds are shown we still get occational buffering on low res.
The HH3 is in the same room that the HH1 used to be (albeit not identical positions due to cabling restrictions) - and unfortunately this is at the opposite end of the house to the living room and TV.
Is there anything that we can do to improve the wireless reception? I'm thinking of channel settings or something to boost the signal. I can't easily move the HH3 without having a lot of trailing wires, and am not willing to pay out for new devices. I'm fairly technically competent, but am a novice in terms of WiFi.
We have a couple of months left on the free trial. If we can't sort out something, then I think we'll be going back to the old service at a third of the price of Infinity. At least we can then watch iPlayer again.
Thanks.

If you are paying for a fast connection, then to make full use of the speed, you are better using Ethernet cables or powerline adapters.
There is some wireless help here.
Wireless connection problems
and some alternatives here
Network connection problems and possible solutions
There are some useful help pages here, for BT Broadband customers only, on my personal website.
BT Broadband customers - help with broadband, WiFi, networking, e-mail and phones.

HomeHub 5 broadband performance worse than OpenRea...

I have been running with an OpenReach modem and HomeHub 3 since I first got infinity. Beguiled by promises of superior WiFi reach and performance I paid to upgrade to HomeHub5. Initial impressions were that WiFi performance was no better. I had split the 2.4GHz and 5GHz channels onto separate SSIDs but was startled a few days later to find the box had just turned off the 2.4 signal with not so much as a by-your-leave.
I am a member of the SamKnows community which runs my uploads and downloads through a separate box and measures the performance. This information is used to supply the powers-that-be with information on actual broadband performance as opposed to marketing claims and I get a monthly report of my own system performance.
On the critical broadband measures - Downstream throughput, Upstream throughput and Latency - the switch shows up on the latest SamKnows report as a degrade of performance. As shown here:
So the question is. What, if anything, can I do to tune the performamce of the modem inside HomeHub 5. Or do I just have toi accept the loss of broadband performance as the price to pay for the unidentified improvement in wi-fi?

you cannot 'tune' the HH5 modem
can you go to troubleshooting then helpdesk and post the stats please
If you like a post, or want to say thanks for a helpful answer, please click on the Ratings star on the left-hand side of the post.
If someone answers your question correctly please let other members know by clicking on ’Mark as Accepted Solution’.

Fonts in KDE always look worse than in GTK for me

Hello, here's a screen shot, compare the fonts of the GTK window with the fonts in the KDE window and judge for yourself:
http://xs127.xs.to/xs127/08225/fonts733.png
I have no specific KDE font configuration enabled, have no ~/fonts.conf either... Why don't fonts look the same in GTK and KDE?
Please post hints/opinions...
Last edited by bughunter2 (2008-05-30 20:44:11)

Try using this in your /etc/fonts/local.conf
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM "fonts.dtd">

<fontconfig>

<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="rgba" >
<const>none</const>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="hinting">
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="hintstyle">
<const>hintfull</const>
</edit>
</match>

<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="antialias">
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>

<match target="pattern" >
<edit mode="assign" name="autohint">
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font">
<test name="weight" compare="more">
<const>medium</const>
</test>
<edit name="autohint" mode="assign">
<bool>false</bool>
</edit>
</match>

<match target="pattern" name="family" >
<test name="family" qual="any" >
<string>Helvetica</string>
</test>
<edit mode="assign" name="family" >
<string>sans-serif</string>
</edit>
</match>
<dir>~/.fonts</dir>
</fontconfig>

Official Apple reseller says "iPhone 5s's camera is much worse than the other"

Hi Apple support and fans,
I am writing to ask you and maybe get Apple's attention to what happened to me. I bought an iPhone 5s 8 days ago. I bought it from official Apple reseller in Warsaw, the capital city of Poland. And then my adventures began.
First, the plug is British, not Polish, because as the reseller said "we have some iPhone not from official distribution, but it will work". Because I needed to buy an iPhone5s fast, I accepted that. However, the question is still there - is it legal to sell British iPhones "from unofficial distribution channel" in Poland?
Second, and more important, my iPhone 5s makes horrible blurred pictures. I mean they are really blurred... I read all the posts on this forum and I tried everything. Finally I decided to visit the reseller and here is what their representative said: "These pictures are totally fine. They are blurred, as this is not a professional camera". Wow! What a discovery. I know that this is not a professional camera, but I know how photos from an iPhone (4 and 4s) might look like. So I replied that something is strange and I wanted to give my iPhone back to check it (under warranty). The representative replied: "We will not take it, and I'm telling you the pictures are all fine. The camera in iPhone 5s is much worse than it was in iPhone 4s and hence the blurred photos. Just live with that".
And now my questions:
1. Is it true that the pictures must be blurred in iPhone 5s, just because it works so? I can't bvelieve it.
2. Isn't the fact that they sell iPhones from "unofficial channels" the reason why they don't want to take the iPhone under warranty?
If anyone from Apple wants to take a closer look at this issue and maybe discover some "strange" actions from Polish official Apple reseller, I'm open to provide you much more details on the purchase, the store location, etc.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
Kuba

iPhones are ONLY sold by Carriers and Apple an Apple reseller is unlikely to be authorised for iPhones and certainly would not sell an iphone with a foreign plug
You have clearly purchased a grey import a genuine Polish sourced iPhone sold by a legitimate iPhone reseller would have the correct plug for the Country
Big issue you have is warranty you need to take to an Apple authorised repairer
https://locate.apple.com/pl/pl/
luckily as long as iPhone came from UK you do have warranty ,EU is one "country" for Apple warranty purposes

Camera Raw 6.1pre - scrolling performance worse than in CR6 for me

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for