 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| ||||||||
 |
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
| 
| User list | Rules | You are not logged in.
Hi
I'm building/upgrading a computer just to render nearly 10'000 Pictures, 36.2 MP each.
Some of you already know about our project other don't, but that's NOT the topic here.
Also I do NOT want to go into discussions if it will be possible to render it or not.
All I want to know and have some opinions on is this:
We're able to connect four harddrives to the system.
Some of them will be SSD others HDD.
Which system should be better for this project:
A) 3 SSD (128GB each) and a 3TB HDD
B) 2 SSD (128GB each) and a 3TB + 2TB HDD
?
btw: Consider the temporary space used should be nearly 1.5TB I think.
Second question:
Should the operating system and autopano be installed on a SSD or HDD? Does it make a difference? Or would it just take unneccessary space away from the valuable SSD space?
Thanks for your help!
Kind Regards from Switzerland
Offline
first question : System A is better
Second question : OS on SSD is nice on startup but rather unimportant when running. Therefore OS on HDD is fine.
Offline
HansKeesom wrote:
first question : System A is better
Second question : OS on SSD is nice on startup but rather unimportant when running. Therefore OS on HDD is fine.
Thanks for the fast response!
I forgot one questions (I think I already know the answer but I want to be sure)
Does it make a difference where (SSD vs HDD) the .jpgs are, which are loaded into autopano?
Offline
Zurich.Gigapixel wrote:
HansKeesom wrote:
first question : System A is better
Second question : OS on SSD is nice on startup but rather unimportant when running. Therefore OS on HDD is fine.Thanks for the fast response!
I forgot one questions (I think I already know the answer but I want to be sure)
Does it make a difference where (SSD vs HDD) the .jpgs are, which are loaded into autopano?
It does not matter other then speed but to save space on SSD I would place them on HDD.
Last edited by HansKeesom (2012-08-25 17:17:20)
Offline
HansKeesom wrote:
... to save space on SSD I would place them on HDD.
I thought so, because the .jpgs which are loaded into autopano are converted into .tiffs and put in the first temporary space anyway (SSD in this case) and are used from there. That's how I atleast imagine it to work.
Regards and thanks again!
Offline
Zurich.Gigapixel wrote:
. . because the .jpgs which are loaded into autopano are converted into .tiffs . .
I´m afraid i don´t understand . . !?
best, Klaus
Offline
klausesser wrote:
I´m afraid i don´t understand . . !?
I think I've read this here on the forum, I could be wrong, please correct me in this case:
When you load your .jpgs into Autopano to render the panorama, autopano will convert all your pictures into .tiffs (as soon as you start rendering it), save it on the temporary space and work with those instead of the original .jpgs.
Last edited by Zurich.Gigapixel (2012-08-25 17:48:33)
Offline
Zurich.Gigapixel wrote:
klausesser wrote:
I´m afraid i don´t understand . . !?
I think I've read this here on the forum, I could be wrong, please correct me in this case:
When you load your .jpgs into Autopano to render the panorama, autopano will convert all your pictures into .tiffs (as soon as you start rendering it), save it on the temporary space and work with those instead of the original .jpgs.
a link to that thread would be interesting for me... to read that piece of information from one kolor staff...
if this is true it would implify that working with jpgs as source images would take longer than instead using tiffs as source images (and that no more needed to be converted inside autopano to "autopano-tiffs").
raw images are getting converted to tiffs by autopano using the dcraw algorithm and thats the reasons why a) it takes longer to process them internally (compared with using tiffs from beginning) and b) its wise to use a external raw converter because of better converting results ...
I use 2 x 120 ozctech SSDs for temp and as source and destination paths. thats ok for smaller projects.
and I never want to go back to HDs because of read/write times. so if this project does have the budget, I would take 2 LSI RAID controller where 8 SSds each can be connected to a RAID0 and would use 160 GB SSDs so 2.8TB in sum are available.
... or one LSI equipped with three/four OCZ OCZSSD2-1CLS500G in one RAID0 as temp, and two further 500GB SSDs for source images and pano destination.
Georg
Last edited by gkaefer (2012-08-25 20:20:16)
Offline
You can copy a temp-file and rename it to be a .tiff. It will then load nicely in a viewer.
The temp-files, whether tiff or not is what APG seems to work on so the originals can be elsewhere.
Still I do load my originals (RAW) onto SSD, but that has a lot to do with the way I work :-)
Offline
gkaefer wrote:
a link to that thread would be interesting for me...
http://www.kolor.com/forum/p83295-2011- … -47#p83295
gkaefer wrote:
so if this project does have the budget, I would take 2 LSI RAID controller where 8 SSds each can be connected to a RAID0 and would use 160 GB SSDs so 2.8TB in sum are available.
... or one LSI equipped with three/four OCZ OCZSSD2-1CLS500G in one RAID0 as temp, and two further 500GB SSDs for source images and pano destination.
This project doesn't have this kind of budget 
Offline
Zurich.Gigapixel wrote:
gkaefer wrote:
a link to that thread would be interesting for me...
Read again . . . "the RAW files are converted to TIFF". 
best, Klaus
Offline
klausesser wrote:
Read again . . . "the RAW files are converted to TIFF".
good point. I should read slower
But that makes me think what autopano does when I'm using .jpgs....
Does it use the .jpgs directly? Without converting them (to .tiffs or whatever) into the temp space?
Should in this case the folder with the .jpgs be on the faster disk (SSD)? (So it renders faster...)
Offline
if you input jpgs it problably still converts to tiff's.
But give it a try, converts your RAW files to jpg, delete all temp-files, start APG and load your jpg's
Offline
Does the amount of RAM make a difference for Autopano? Going from 8GB to 16GB on my MBP made a huge difference, reduced stitching time by about 40%. Having more in a desktop may help, but it depends on the OS and Autopano if it can actually use it.
Offline
Mike,
Depends on the resolution of the input images and their number.
See here for calculating the RAM you need
http://www.kolor.com/forum/p87033-2011- … -58#p87033
Last edited by HansKeesom (2012-09-16 17:30:55)
Offline
Zurich.Gigapixel wrote:
klausesser wrote:
Read again . . . "the RAW files are converted to TIFF".
good point. I should read slower
But that makes me think what autopano does when I'm using .jpgs....
Does it use the .jpgs directly? Without converting them (to .tiffs or whatever) into the temp space?
Should in this case the folder with the .jpgs be on the faster disk (SSD)? (So it renders faster...)
this is probably a little late to reply, but the advantage of TIFF is that its lossless and you can use 16-bit, for better color quality.
So how is your project going? I have just added a 24 channel RAID controller to my system, which i slowly will add to.
Next is to source 16GB RAM sticks and hope its compatible ;-)
Henrik
Offline
I'm planning to "reorganize" my disks and need a confirmation. Is this what I need for the ultimate disk setup for a APG-machine:
1) OS - hdd (once started not very much disk-access)
2) OS pagefile - SSD1
3) OS temp -SSD2
4) APG sourcefiles - SSD3
5) APG destinationfile - SSD4
6) APG temp/scratch - SSD RAID as fast I/O as my $$$ can buy
Is there anything I have forgot ? Is there anything not needed ?
I know that enough RAM makes some of the above obsolete:
image MB x4 x number of pics for processing everything in RAM (16MB x4 x2000images - > 128GB RAM)
maybe, some day, I will build this computer
http://www.asus.com/Server_Workstation/ … s/Z9PED16/
and give it 512GB RAM :-)
leifs
Last edited by leifs (2012-09-18 00:09:55)
Offline
Hi Leif,
I haven't tried with just single drives/SSD - how much ram do you have at the moment? ok just saw that 48gb....;-)
i don' think you will need more 3 sets OS/APPS - WIN/AGP/PTGUI/TEMP/PS/SCRATCH/PAGE - STORAGE
splitting it up further may make a small difference, but i haven't tried.
just remember it will run as fast as the slowest part.
hej fra Australien
Henrik
Offline
