DXO, Deep Prime XD

[Olly B]

Just a quick question, has anyone else experience a real uptick in the speed of deep prime xd, when processing images? I use an Olympus em1 mk3 camera on a 2019 (I think) iMac, and when I click on deep prime xd, I hardly see it working anymore, the processing history indicates its been applied and the subsequent jpeg image looks great, but it is either now blisteringly fast, or I have a glitch!!

Thanks

 

[Box Brownie]

Just a quick question, has anyone else experience a real uptick in the speed of deep prime xd, when processing images? I use an Olympus em1 mk3 camera on a 2019 (I think) iMac, and when I click on deep prime xd, I hardly see it working anymore, the processing history indicates its been applied and the subsequent jpeg image looks great, but it is either now blisteringly fast, or I have a glitch!!

Thanks

It was my understanding that Prime HQ was applied automatically to jpeg files. Prime, Deep Prime & especially Deep Prime XD were/worked at their best on raw files.

I only shoot raw so have not observed how Prime etc behaves on jpegs. But I would for sure expect it to be very quick!

Or have I completely misunderstood your post......

FWIW on my new PC compared to the old one PrimeXD runs nice and quick......the spinning is over in seconds in the preview window( I do wish the effect was visible in the main window like all the other editing functions).

 

[Olly B]

Thanks for your reply, I should have been clearer, I do process the raw files with deep prime DX and then export them as JPEG’s, I’m just really surprised at how fast deep prime DX now appears to be, I don’t even have the little progress bar, it’s so fast!?

I totally agree, it would be nice to have the effect visible on the raw file, rather than having to export it to see the result.

 

[Box Brownie]

Thanks for your reply, I should have been clearer, I do process the raw files with deep prime DX and then export them as JPEG’s, I’m just really surprised at how fast deep prime DX now appears to be, I don’t even have the little progress bar, it’s so fast!?

I totally agree, it would be nice to have the effect visible on the raw file, rather than having to export it to see the result.

Which version are you on..... v6.7 is the most current but I have yet to update, IIRC I am still on v6.3.1

I have downloaded all the updates......I just wait to see how things settle in

 

[Bebop]

I use it on an ageing MacBook Pro (2014 model that I got in 2015, but top spec then), and I haven't noticed it speed up for me. I'm on the latest version.
I really wish it would!
I use an OM1.
Edit : Looking at the last few exports, the last Deep Prime Xd export to jpeg was 5 minutes 13 seconds.

@Box Brownie unless things have changed, I don't think you can use Prime, or the subsequent versions with jpegs... which is a shame. It's one area where other software is ahead.

 

[tijuana taxi]

I used the trial version and it was mighty slow.
Deep Prime is slow on my machine too, but I only process one or two at a time.
Working on Intel integrated graphics, took out the GPU because I wanted the slot for a good soundcard.

 

[Olly B]

I’ve just watched one of Rob Trek’s YouTube videos on dxo and noticed that deep prime DX seemed to be pretty fast, perhaps it is down to the computer, though I know it was certainly slower a couple of months ago, curious! They do seem to issue quite a few updates so perhaps that was embedded within one of them? My old MacBook Pro gave up the ghost late last year(that was slow!!), I certainly noticed a difference with the new iMac, but as above, now it seems blisteringly fast!

Although I usually process raw files, I agree it would be rather handy if it would work with jpegs !

 

[droj]

I totally agree, it would be nice to have the effect visible on the raw file, rather than having to export it to see the result.

But there's an instant preview of the effect on the raw, which alters as you move any of the controls ... are you zooming in to check your image? Changes only get baked in on export, and that's when any lag might occur ...

Can't comment on speed.

Working on Intel integrated graphics, took out the GPU because I wanted the slot for a good soundcard.

I'd have left the graphics card in, and got an external DAC ... ;-)

 

[tijuana taxi]

I'd have left the graphics card in, and got an external DAC ... ;-)

It was only a cheapo Graphics card that came with the PC.
Integrated is fine for Lightroom and i'm in no rush to process anything.
Much prefer having the internal soundcard, also have a DAC, but its in use elsewhere