hangs on wipe

[Rkonrad]

Hi Ivo,

I downloaded the most recent version and when I try to do a wipe with gradient or vignetting, it just hangs/never completes. This happens only when I apply a lasso mask. It occurs with both my computers which have different hardware. Both are running linux mint 18.3 cinnamon.

Cheers

Richard

[admin]

Thank you for reporting this. I will investigate...

[admin]

Just tried to replicate this, but no luck....
Would you be able to share a mask + image where this happens for you? Both mask and image can just be a small & heavily compressed JPEGs, uploaded to the forum. I don't think the the actual data would be important for this one...

EDIT: I can see a slight delay, where there is nothing in the status bar (it is healing the image), but on my Machine it only tales a few seconds...

[Lou]

Hi,
I wanted to report the same problem.
It take up to a few minutes until Starttools keeps going on.
The time depends on object size I am trying to mask out.

greetings
Lou

[admin]

Hi,
I wanted to report the same problem.
It take up to a few minutes until Starttools keeps going on.
The time depends on object size I am trying to mask out.

greetings
Lou

Hi Lou,

Though annoying, this does indeed sounds like "expected" behavior. Especially if Wipe only has few samples to work with, this can take a while. Just for reference, what is the resolution of the image you are processing and what are your computer's specs?

Thanks!

Ivo

[Lou]

Hi,
FITS file ~64MB 4656x3520
Computer specs:
i7-7500 @2,7Ghz and 16GB RAM Windows 10pro

[admin]

Hi,
FITS file ~64MB 4656x3520
Computer specs:
i7-7500 @2,7Ghz and 16GB RAM Windows 10pro

Thanks Lou. That sounds about right unfortunately at that resolution and those specs, especially if you are masking out large portions of the image. The i7-7500U, while very efficient with power usage, is only a dual core CPU and not terribly fast.

Is there a marked difference in Wipe's results if you refrain from masking out the object? At lower Aggressiveness settings it may not matter too much...

[Lou]

Hi,
FITS file ~64MB 4656x3520
Computer specs:
i7-7500 @2,7Ghz and 16GB RAM Windows 10pro

Thanks Lou. That sounds about right unfortunately at that resolution and those specs, especially if you are masking out large portions of the image. The i7-7500U, while very efficient with power usage, is only a dual core CPU and not terribly fast.

Is there a marked difference in Wipe's results if you refrain from masking out the object? At lower Aggressiveness settings it may not matter too much...

Hi,
Without masking out the object everything runs fast. Also changing the aggressiveness settings does not solve the problem.
Sounds like if I need a new computer
Should it be a quad or even a octa core ? Also how many RAM makes sense ?

Thanks for your support
Greetings
Lou

[admin]

Hi,
FITS file ~64MB 4656x3520
Computer specs:
i7-7500 @2,7Ghz and 16GB RAM Windows 10pro

Thanks Lou. That sounds about right unfortunately at that resolution and those specs, especially if you are masking out large portions of the image. The i7-7500U, while very efficient with power usage, is only a dual core CPU and not terribly fast.

Is there a marked difference in Wipe's results if you refrain from masking out the object? At lower Aggressiveness settings it may not matter too much...

Hi,
Without masking out the object everything runs fast. Also changing the aggressiveness settings does not solve the problem.
Sounds like if I need a new computer
Should it be a quad or even a octa core ? Also how many RAM makes sense ?

Thanks for your support
Greetings
Lou

Hi Lou,

First see if not masking out the object at all makes a big difference. With a lowered Aggressiveness setting, it may not make much of a difference.
StarTools runs best on desktop CPUs (which are free to draw a lot more power). Of course, stationary desktops aren't always a feasible proposition for everyone.
Truth be told, you already have one of the faster battery-conscious consumer laptops money can buy! 16GB is a good amount of memory - no problems there either.
A quad-core or six-core is probably the price/performance sweetspot for StarTools, as parallelizing gets diminishing returns beyond that in most algorithms StarTools employs.
If you don't have to, don't process at higher resolutions than necessary to convey 1:1 detail. It will greatly speed up processing.

If you can swing it though, you can pick up very powerful ex-office machines for peanuts these days. Especially the OEM systems from Dell, HP, etc. that governments and universities dump after 3 years or so, are perfect for image processing applications that don't rely on a GPU (StarTools does not for various reasons). A 3rd of 4th gen desktop i7 has 4 cores, 8 threads and would perform about 1.5x-2.5x as fast as your laptop, depending on the task.

[Lou]

Hi Ivo,
I upgraded my old Desktop PC today and I run a quick test - Laptop vs. Desktop PC.
11min15sec vs. 4min 50sec for the final noise reduction step.

My Desktop PC is operating with 16GB Ram and a AMD Ryzen 5 2600, 6x 3.40GHz processor. No new graphic card.
Very happy with the improvement and no more problems with the "hangs on wipe"

CS
Lou