Image-stitching and virtual tour solutions My account Updates
It is currently Tue Oct 21, 2014 11:24 am

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:28 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
Klaus, as long as you think your opinion is the same as a fact, there is no point in discussing anything with you. Therefore and again, I give up.

Apologies accepted

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:47 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:01 pm
Posts: 3340
Location: Salzburg
HansKeesom wrote:
You can test thing for yourself asking a $200 credit or a 14 day free ride

http://www.opsource.net/Services/Cloud-Hosting/Free-Trial-200-Dollar-Cloud-Offer

prices can be seen at http://www.opsource.net/Services/Cloud-Hosting/Pricing

I made my calculation based on 1 day a month so 3%, just for the few times I need to work on a panorama that does not finish on my 16 GB machine.

Hans,

I did Review the Price calculator. So for doing rare Projects - you did mention 1day a month - you get this 64GB RAM/10GB HD/1CPU vsphere4 VM for 50$ per month.
so compared to a Workstation worth 4000€ - I can follow your arguments. But is it a wise decision? I dont think so.

is ith worth the additional time waiting uploading all raw Images of a gigapixel Project maybe multiplied with bracket shots? time is Money. So some hours of your 24hours you run your VM & pay for it waiting while uploading the Images. To get it faster (in most countries XDSL uplink are far slower than Downloads, so having a fast uplink also does cost more/month, also the 29 days/month you dont need it for your VM...)

more important: each time you start "your" VM... is it the same one that you left last month? or is a new clean one you've to install your WIn Server 2008 once again, autopano again etc. I did not search for this info on the link... so maybe this is no issue at all.

on other side. having a Workstation for 4000€ in local Office does also Speed up smaller Projects....

(is Software/Service in your Country tax deductible? Hardware should be in most countries.)

so I would use such a Service only in starting Business Phase if my local 16GB PC would fail to render the gigapixel pano.

Liebe Gruesse,
Georg

EDIT: and VMs can not access high sophisticated graphic cards like a nvidia GTX (because the ISPs dont plug them in). VMs in the cloud access the serverboard onboard graphic chip hardware and further do use an graphic card driver provided by the VM Company. and they use shared Memory of the RAM. So I dont think it is fun working on gigapixel panos zooming deep and using the preview option in autopano (if available at all). So also a backdraw.

_________________
pages: gigapixel.at - jedermann.at - My Equipment


Last edited by gkaefer on Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:02 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:49 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Dane in Western Australia
Well, the good side of this is we have a choice. We all have to make one that suits the kind of business or clients we have. I think cloud computing is an interesting option, but it's very limited to me due to the slow broadband we have here (Australia), heck my 75 year old mum in Denmark has 5-10 faster broadband the I have.

I think the bottom line for me and the people I do work with, is that they want to know that their files are limited in access. Having a powerful computer is the cost of doing business.

If I didn't have those limitation, then probably next time around, I would look into cloud computing. It's been interesting to look into, so thanks to everyone who participated :-)

All the best

Henrik

Ps: I don't think anyone here should feel offended, it's been an exchange of ideas and information, which I think each and everyone one of us have tried our bestest :-)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:42 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
Hi George,

Of course one will problably only use such service when the machine one already has is not able to do a certain job. Or when this machine is not doing this job fast enough.

Is it worth the additional wait of uploading everything? If the panorama won't detect or render on the machine you have, what is your alternative? Go to the shop and spend 4000€? Yes you can do that, but this might be another option.

Using dropbox.com you can upload to dropbox at your own local ADSL speed. Depends on what speed you have of course.

Only when all is uploaded to dropbox will I start the VM. As it is connected to highspeed internet, it should download from dropbox fast Of course I will start the VM with only one CPU and very little RAM to save some money. Once the download is done, I can stop the machine, increase the CPU's and RAM and start it again to have full force for the processing.

While you are not using the machine you can reduce the machine in CPU and RAM to 1 CPU & 1 GB RAM and make things even a little cheaper, storing it like that it should cost only 2 dollars a month. Running it with 8 CPU and 64 MB will cost less then 2 dollar an hour. So running it for 24 hours a month would be indeed 50 dollars a month.
But I guess when doing a gigapan these 48 dollars should be easy to find in the budget, the VM will pay for itself.

Yes each time you start the machine it is exactly like you left it behind.

At the moment I am doing already projects for other photographers. They send me their files by ftp and dropbox. If things get to busy for my local machine I might decide to do part of my projects on the VM machine, even when the projects are small enough to be done on my local machine. Having a 4 core 16 GB VM is only 70 cents an hour which I find not very expensive to have as an extra machine.

I am still testing things, maybe in some days I will have to conclude it will not work, but for the moment I am positive.

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 3:10 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:49 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Dane in Western Australia
The interesting part here is how much do you charge for a gigapano ? And how long does it take?
What is the turnaround time to the client?

Henrik

Ps: just like in any other business section one might charge $100 and someone else $1000 for perceived similar task


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:09 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
Hi Henrik

I have no idea what i woulld charge for a gigapan. i guess it all depends on the quality of the shots and the time I need to spend on it. And of course the time the machine needs to run. Of course I will try to charge more then that when possible.

Turnaround time will include the time to upload files using dropbox or anything alike. I am testing at the moment with a 20 GB project, dropbox is rather slow on the 20 GB line I am using for it. So this might not be for anyone on a slow internet connection

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:25 pm 
Offline
New member

Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 2
Thank you all for the replies.
Sorry that my reply took a while. I will make it up to you now :)



gkaefer wrote:
PS: first posting :cool: welcome on forum! Actually you're not the first one posting in first post talking & asking about gigapixels. So I dont knwo how many gigas you did made, so sorry if you're an old stager ;) but most importand much more than having 64GB Ram Servers available is practise practise and much more practise. each single project will give you new sticks & bumpers you've to sturggle with. so getting familar with workflows is wise to do it with 18mm sphericals ....;)

I looked for an introduction post but I could not find one... (maybe an idea to create a post for first-time posters?)
To introduce myself: I make panoramic photos for fun, to keep me busy both outdoors and indoors. Up to now I made some 30'ish panoramas 360 as well as gigapanos. Some of them are waiting to be processed. Some are finished (and printed in a private photo book), and some of them are published at gigapan.com.
At this moment I use a Canon 7d with a Tokina 12-24, Canon 17-40 mm, 50 mm (plasticfantastic) and 100 mm (macro). This is installed on a NodalNinja 3 mkII.
I have a 70-200 and 300 mm Canon but the NN head is too weak to hold such a combination.

I am far from being a perfect panorama maker. But with each next project I try to avoid mistakes I previously made.
The lesson I have learned is that you have to take the time. Think things over before you start and watch, watch, watch.
Luckily, I remember most of my mistakes when taking the photos, so that is a good thing.
I am, however, tend to start with the most complex hard-to-do projects instead of the simple things. But that is a pitfall I have to deal with all my life :rolleyes: (I remember the Pascal programming lessons at school, the simple count up and count down was way too simple. It had to do at least back and forth simultaniously...)

With that in mind I can imagine George's question. Do you need 64 GB or do you first need more experience?
Well. The latter, actually. But... the origin of the question is that A) my latest project was a simple but big file that did not liked my current computer very much, and B) the successor must stay in operation for the next five or six years.
As I do not know what kind of projects I will be doing in that period (payed or unpayed), I want to make sure I will make the correct choice now. Interim updates (beside adding HHD's) never worked for me. And trying to save money now mostly will end in spending more money later on.
At this moment I have a nice budget to do it right, but that will change in the future. (I am not pessimistic though.)



gkaefer wrote:
I posted some days ago a setup of an new Computer 2011 socket, Xeon based.
http://www.kolor.com/forum/p109335-2012-12-27-13-19-21#p109335
the "addon" option of SSD I mentioned is more than that. so maybe rather reduce the 6discRAID5 to a RAID1 with 2 discs but do not miss the SSDs.
the setup is fit for next two years. a second Xeon can be added to add more 6cores/12threads and RAM can be upgraded up to 256GB with this setup and if you replace them to bigger ones than even up to 512GB.

That would be a nice "I want that" configuration.
But unfortunately, way beyond my budget (about 3 times).
The 64 GB RAM route will cost me 250 EUR more than the same configuration with 32 GB, due to the extra costs of the 2011 motherboard and the extra memory. When put the i7-3930k on my list instead of the i7-3820 it costs me an extra 250 EUR (but I get more power in return).
If the 32 GB is enough, then I can spend the extra money on SSDs to (partially) compensate the lack of memory, faster swap than using plattered HDDs.
I spoke to an old collegue. He has a new workstation with 64 GB RAM and he is going to test my file in comination with Photoshop, in various situations.



gkaefer wrote:
About memory and PS: no idea if there are limits (does the 300.000 x 300.000 pixel limit still exist in PS?)
autopano & memory calculation for RAM: http://www.kolor.com/forum/p87033-2011-08-11-11-53-58#p87033
So if you wanna do gigapixels on a regular job basis you need to save time and to make better use of the resources, I would use 64GB with trend to more.

The 300k limit is still there. And with an 4:1 ratio I do not think I will ever reacht that limit.
I read and did the calculations in that post. But this only applies on APx. It does not tell enything about opening and using a stiched psb in Photoshop.



tived wrote:
To the OP, i have 48GB and the ability to overclock a dual XEON X5650 @ 2.66Ghz to 4.3Ghz or I can stick in another 48GB for a total 96GB and I can only squeeze 3.1Ghz with the type of ram I am using now with 96GB. Now I do occasionally work on 10-20GB file sizes, and this is heavy lifting. As you noted in your current config, that you could do things to the file in Photoshop, but when it came to saving it, things would have stood still or at least appeared to have done so. Why! Slow storage!!! ;-) You need to have a storage array fast enough to off load the data to disk/SSD, in this case you will need a nice fast array. With my current setup, which is a bit slow at the moment I can average 1GB/sec and peak at 4GB/sec thats with 2x 6 SSD's in RAID-0 which makes it RAID-00 of 12 disks (across two controllers), plus i have another 8 SSD RAID-0 for my OS/apps on a 3rd controller.

My current wish list (in combination with the i7-3770(k)) includes a two-disk SSD raid 0 for scratch and temp purposes. More than a two-disk configuration is not 'possible' now for me.
About the overclocking. This seems to be a magic word in computerland these days. But how reliable is this? If you overclock, do you use it temporarily or at on a daily basis? What do you gain when, for example you overclock from 3.5 to 4.2 GHz? And in the long run, how much does it affect the health of the system? As said before, the new computer must last five or six years (or more).



tived wrote:
You can use Hans's calculator and try and work out how much you need, but most single CPU's boards are limited to 64GB of RAM

Although I can affort to put more than 64 GB on the motherboard, prices for the sticks is more than I am willing to spend.



HansKeesom wrote:
Just throwing in my two cents : instead of buying a machine it might be an idea to hire on in the cloud.

That cloud discussion, well for me it is not an option. I do not like cloud computing (altough I have a Dropbox account) for various reasons. I like to have full control on my work.
And beside that: the time that it will take to upload, process and download is more than when I do it on my local computer.
East, west, home's best. So to say.



manneke-d


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:04 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Posts: 7804
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
HansKeesom wrote:
Klaus, as long as you think your opinion is the same as a fact, there is no point in discussing anything with you. Therefore and again, I give up.

Apologies accepted

Hans - an opinion is what it says: an opinion. You ask me to accept your opinion - what i do of course. Therefore i ask you to accept my opinion also.
As i said: my opinion bases on experiences which i gathered with the way you suggest and with very big image-files resp. very much images of large size each. That, of course, doesn´t mean i doubt your opinion, but i have simply differing experiences.

best, Klaus

_________________
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:18 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Posts: 7804
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
HansKeesom wrote:
I am still testing things, maybe in some days I will have to conclude it will not work, but for the moment I am positive.

Being positive always is a good idea :cool:

But to pin it down to facts: did you ever in real life worked a, let´s say, 6 Gigapixel panorama via the cloud the way you suggest?

best, Klaus

_________________
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 7:10 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
manneke-d wrote:
HansKeesom wrote:
Just throwing in my two cents : instead of buying a machine it might be an idea to hire on in the cloud.

That cloud discussion, well for me it is not an option. I do not like cloud computing (altough I have a Dropbox account) for various reasons. I like to have full control on my work.
And beside that: the time that it will take to upload, process and download is more than when I do it on my local computer.
East, west, home's best. So to say.



manneke-d

It is absolutely true that uploading to the cloud takes longer, much longer then loading from camera into local computer. And I surely recommend to have a local computer that can deal with those projects that are shot yesterday and need to be online tomorrow.
99 percent of the projects I do I can deal with on my local computer. 1 percent is to large for it. For these I am investigating the VM.

Can I ask in what way one has no full control when working on a VM?

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 5:05 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
klausesser wrote:
HansKeesom wrote:
I am still testing things, maybe in some days I will have to conclude it will not work, but for the moment I am positive.

Being positive always is a good idea :cool:

But to pin it down to facts: did you ever in real life worked a, let´s say, 6 Gigapixel panorama via the cloud the way you suggest?

best, Klaus

I have run APG with non-gigapixel-panoramas on a VM a year ago but at the time the VM machine I could create was limited to 16 GB RAM and 4 cores therefore I found not much point to pursue this idea.
I also had already my real workstation with about the same or better specificatons so processing my own non-giga-panoramas on that was faster (no upload time) and cheaper.

At the moment I am uploading a 5800 photo panorama with a total size of 21 GB to dropbox. This is a panorama that did not run on my real machine. The uploading is not really a technicall challenge but to do it in reasonable time is. Despite many warnings I find dropbox to stay closely to my max upload speed and I have asked friends with higher upload speeds to report their experiences with dropbox. Wetransfer, although limited to 2 GB files, could be an alternative.
I don't see a problem running a gigapixel panorama on the VM itself. But please have some patience...

Of course I am also looking at the costs of everything.
For the moment it looks like this :
-Doing nothing with the VM and just keeping it turned off (as a 1 CPU 1 GB RAM 60 GB hardisk) machine that is turned off) will cost 1,60 euro a month.
-Running this machine (1 CPU 1 GB RAM) will cost 70,62 euro a month ( or a bit over 2 euro a day). It may sound senseless to have a machine running with 1 GB but it is all you need while syncing (with dropbox at 300-500 KB/sec).
-Running the VM with full armor, 8 CPU's and 64 GB of RAM will cost about 50 euro a day or 1560 euro a month.

For the moment it looks like I will only use the VM machine for photos that are send to me over the internet by other photographers to be stiched DURING times that my own real machine is already very busy (or lacks the RAM needed for a project). For my own photos/panoramas I will absolutely use my own machine.


Did the famous speedtest with 2 CPU and 32 GB RAM. Results are a bit disappointing ....
E:\\speedtest_autopano.psb ( 2.93 GB )

337 images
Size: 81800 x 9635
FOVRMS: 2.47
Lens: Standard
Projection: Cylindrical
Color: LDR


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Total benchmark time: 30 min:24 s
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer description
Operating System : Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 64-bit SP1 | 10-240-15-11
CPU Description : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-4650 0 @ 2.70GHz
CPU cores : 1 used / 2 total
Memory total : 32 GB
Memory used : 27.6 GB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimization benchmark: 198.564 ms
Local approach: 0 ns
First optimization: 0 ns
Final optimization: 0 ns
LDC/MV: 0 ns
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Previewing benchmark: 30.2159 s
ComputePosition: 469.179 ms
RenderPieces: 29.6529 s
ColorEq: 979.601 ns
Blending: 91.5626 ms
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rendering benchmark: 29 min:54 s
Initialization: 320.521 ms
Warping: 18 min:59 s
Cutting: 1 min:43 s
Blending: 6 min:46 s
Saving: 1 min:31 s
Temporary data read/write: 0 Bytes/0 Bytes

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Last edited by HansKeesom on Sat Jan 05, 2013 7:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 9:54 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:08 pm
Posts: 607
Location: Ørsta Norway
Maybe you should have another look at your hardware, trying to remove bottlenecks. 30 min is much.
Without any special preparations I got this result:

Leif


---------------------------------------------------------------------
H:/Pano Speedtest\speedtest_autopano.psb ( 2.93 GB )

337 images
Size: 81800 x 9635
FOVRMS: 2.47
Lens: Standard
Projection: Cylindrical
Color: LDR


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Total benchmark time: 5 min:9 s
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer description
Operating System : Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit SP1 | LEIF-PC-WS
CPU Description : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU X 980 @ 3.33GHz
CPU cores : 12 used / 12 total
Memory total : 48 GB
Memory used : 39.2 GB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimization benchmark: 84.1686 ms
Local approach: 0 ns
First optimization: 0 ns
Final optimization: 0 ns
LDC/MV: 0 ns
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Previewing benchmark: 914.194 ms
ComputePosition: 268.347 ms
RenderPieces: 0 ns
ColorEq: 0 ns
Blending: 0 ns
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rendering benchmark: 5 min:8 s
Initialization: 289.127 ms
Warping: 2 min:16 s
Cutting: 51.9385 s
Blending: 59.8949 s
Saving: 19.2497 s
Temporary data read/write: 0 Bytes/0 Bytes

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M1, Panasonic 8mm f3.5 fisheye, Leica 25mm f1.4, Olympus 75mm f1.8, Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L
Seitz VRdrive2
Intel i7 980X, 48GB RAM, Win7 64bit, SSD RAIDs


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:01 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:08 pm
Posts: 607
Location: Ørsta Norway
After a second look at your result and mine it seems like warping is your achilles heel:
your system use 19 min while mine use 2 min

Leif

Rendering benchmark: 29 min:54 s
Initialization: 320.521 ms
Warping: 18 min:59 s
Cutting: 1 min:43 s
Blending: 6 min:46 s
Saving: 1 min:31 s

vs mine
Rendering benchmark: 5 min:8 s
Initialization: 289.127 ms
Warping: 2 min:16 s
Cutting: 51.9385 s
Blending: 59.8949 s
Saving: 19.2497 s

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M1, Panasonic 8mm f3.5 fisheye, Leica 25mm f1.4, Olympus 75mm f1.8, Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L
Seitz VRdrive2
Intel i7 980X, 48GB RAM, Win7 64bit, SSD RAIDs


Last edited by leifs on Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:07 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
Remarkable, what can have caused that?

Maybe I shouldn't have been doing other things at the same time on that computer........or I should kick in 8 cores instead of 2 and 64 GB instead of 32 GB. Finetuning VM-machines, a whole new world ;-)

leifs wrote:
After a second look at your result and mine it seems that warping is your achilles heel:
your system use 19 min while mine use 2 min

Leif

Rendering benchmark: 29 min:54 s
Initialization: 320.521 ms
Warping: 18 min:59 s
Cutting: 1 min:43 s
Blending: 6 min:46 s
Saving: 1 min:31 s

vs mine
Rendering benchmark: 5 min:8 s
Initialization: 289.127 ms
Warping: 2 min:16 s
Cutting: 51.9385 s
Blending: 59.8949 s
Saving: 19.2497 s

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:18 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:08 pm
Posts: 607
Location: Ørsta Norway
HansKeesom wrote:
Remarkable, what can have caused that?

In my system:
Really fast temp/scratch-disks. SSDs in RAID 0.
Enough RAM to avoid heavy disk access (much faster than SDDs in RAID 0)

How to achieve that in VM's I don't know.

Leif

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M1, Panasonic 8mm f3.5 fisheye, Leica 25mm f1.4, Olympus 75mm f1.8, Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L
Seitz VRdrive2
Intel i7 980X, 48GB RAM, Win7 64bit, SSD RAIDs


Last edited by leifs on Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:23 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
Very easy. Stop the machine, change RAM settings in edit mode, start machine again. No need for scratch then I think.
Is iSCSI fast?
leifs wrote:
HansKeesom wrote:
Remarkable, what can have caused that?

In my system:
Really fast temp/scratch-disks. SSDs in RAID 0.
Enough RAM to avoid heavy disk access (much faster than SDDs in RAID 0)

How to achieve that in VM's I don't know.

Leif

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Last edited by HansKeesom on Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:31 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:08 pm
Posts: 607
Location: Ørsta Norway
The proof is in the pudding :)

The best result is achieved if the job can be done in RAM only, without diskaccess.
The more diskaccess the slower. A lot of diskaccess to slow (=traditional hdds) results in a loooong wait.

Leif

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M1, Panasonic 8mm f3.5 fisheye, Leica 25mm f1.4, Olympus 75mm f1.8, Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L
Seitz VRdrive2
Intel i7 980X, 48GB RAM, Win7 64bit, SSD RAIDs


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 11:02 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
I will do another test and keep an eye on disk i/0.

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:38 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:01 pm
Posts: 3340
Location: Salzburg
you both reference to "speedtest_autopano" and the same 337 Images... is it available to download on Forum?
... allways interested in famous things :D
Georg

_________________
pages: gigapixel.at - jedermann.at - My Equipment


Last edited by gkaefer on Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:56 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
http://hdview.at/speedtest/index.html

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 2:20 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:01 pm
Posts: 3340
Location: Salzburg
HansKeesom wrote:

thanks. interested in doing it on my PC ;-).
it is stated to render it unmodified... clear... but if I want render it it Shows by Default 98% size and not 100%. so did you run the tests with 98% or with changing Setup to 100% ?
Georg

EDIT: using the 98% Win 764bit 16GB Ram and source files on an HD RAID-0 of 2 discs and temp on same disc with 890GB free space:

M:/speedtest\speedtest_autopano.psb ( 2.93 GB )

337 images
Size: 81800 x 9635
FOVRMS: 2.47
Lens: Standard
Projection: Cylindrical
Color: LDR


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Total benchmark time: 15 min:20 s
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer description
Operating System : Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit SP1 | GKAEFER-PC
CPU Description : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 860 @ 2.80GHz
CPU cores : 8 used / 8 total
Memory total : 16 GB
Memory used : 8.82 GB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimization benchmark: 90.1911 ms
Local approach: 0 ns
First optimization: 0 ns
Final optimization: 0 ns
LDC/MV: 0 ns
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Previewing benchmark: 1.29961 s
ComputePosition: 305.614 ms
RenderPieces: 0 ns
ColorEq: 0 ns
Blending: 0 ns
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rendering benchmark: 15 min:18 s
Initialization: 344.267 ms
Warping: 4 min:6 s
Cutting: 2 min:0 s
Blending: 5 min:45 s
Saving: 2 min:27 s
Temporary data read/write: 10.2 GB/10.0 GB


EDIT 2: after fresh reboot I'Ve more Memory available - in result I can gain 1 more Minute in Speed:

M:/speedtest\speedtest_autopano.psb ( 2.93 GB )

337 images
Size: 81800 x 9635
FOVRMS: 2.47
Lens: Standard
Projection: Cylindrical
Color: LDR


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Total benchmark time: 14 min:10 s
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer description
Operating System : Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit SP1 | GKAEFER-PC
CPU Description : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 860 @ 2.80GHz
CPU cores : 8 used / 8 total
Memory total : 16 GB
Memory used : 10.4 GB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimization benchmark: 161.841 ms
Local approach: 0 ns
First optimization: 0 ns
Final optimization: 0 ns
LDC/MV: 0 ns
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Previewing benchmark: 1.71186 s
ComputePosition: 524.841 ms
RenderPieces: 0 ns
ColorEq: 0 ns
Blending: 0 ns
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rendering benchmark: 14 min:8 s
Initialization: 339.78 ms
Warping: 3 min:57 s
Cutting: 2 min:12 s
Blending: 4 min:53 s
Saving: 2 min:10 s
Temporary data read/write: 8.56 GB/8.20 GB

_________________
pages: gigapixel.at - jedermann.at - My Equipment


Last edited by gkaefer on Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 6:49 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:49 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Dane in Western Australia
ouch, 30 min on the cloud computer, there is not much to be gained there?

upload the info to the speedtest site, and let bernard rate it. and place you on the ladder, this will help u get an idea how you have performed. have a look at some of the other systems and their configs and see how they compare or differ

Henrik


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 10:31 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
Problem solved. Autopano was on monocore. I did not notice that while running the machine on two cores, but running on 8 cores the problem was clearly visible.

Running autopano on all 8 cores and 64 GB of RAM gave the results below. I could see memory going to 54 GB while blending. CPU was at 95-100 % all the time where autopano was taking 90-95%.

Now the VM's first goal was not to break records, it is to make it possible to detect and render panoramas that are too big for the real machine I have.
Secondary goal is to have extra capacity when the real machine I have is too busy already with other projects.
With these two goals in mind I am happy as things are going. I now have a 64 GB RAM 8 * Xeon workstation available at only 1,60 euro a month when I don't use it and 50 euro for each day I do use it. Also I can duplicate the VM in an instance when needed giving me multiple workstations all for the same price.
To be honest, uploading the photos can take some time. My 8/1 ADSL line does 6 GB in 24 hours with dropbox. The VM will download/upload to dropbox much faster but will need about 2 hours for 6 GB I think.

F:/speedtestunzipped\speedtest_autopano.psb ( 2.93 GB )

337 images
Size: 81800 x 9635
FOVRMS: 2.47
Lens: Standard
Projection: Cylindrical
Color: LDR


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Total benchmark time: 10 min:43 s
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer description
Operating System : Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 64-bit SP1 | 10-240-15-11
CPU Description : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-4650 0 @ 2.70GHz
CPU cores : 8 used / 8 total
Memory total : 64 GB
Memory used : 58.1 GB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimization benchmark: 94.3077 ms
Local approach: 0 ns
First optimization: 0 ns
Final optimization: 0 ns
LDC/MV: 0 ns
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Previewing benchmark: 37.744 s
ComputePosition: 294.025 ms
RenderPieces: 37.3875 s
ColorEq: 979.697 ns
Blending: 61.7736 ms
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rendering benchmark: 10 min:5 s
Initialization: 312.518 ms
Warping: 4 min:23 s
Cutting: 1 min:5 s
Blending: 2 min:17 s
Saving: 1 min:24 s
Temporary data read/write: 0 Bytes/0 Bytes

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 5:47 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:53 pm
Posts: 2137
We are a few months later and I have some more experience.

I still use the VM's, but not for rendering, only for editing and previewing. The optimal for me is to run two VM's with the maximum of 64 GB and 8 cores each. This set allows me to have 8 editor open at the same time and move from one editor to another to check preview at high zoom in and quickly make correction when needed. It allows me to be very productive and make very high quality .pano files in little time.
The resulting .pano files are synced back to my real workstation where they are generated into .psb. This avoid having to sync the psb from the VM back home, which would take a very long time.

Costwise I have to admit it is not cheap. I used the VM workstations only a few days and already it costs me about 10% of what a new workstation would cost me. So I decided to order that new workstation though I expect it not to be as fast as the VM's. It is a fine line.
The VM's can still be used when my increasing stitching work suddenly skyrockets.

_________________
Regards, Hans Keesom
I stitch and render for other photographers. Price: RMS^3, no cure no pay. If you want to concentrate on your business let me do the stitching for you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:52 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:49 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Dane in Western Australia
Hi Hans,
What sort of system are you getting?

Henrik
From Marble Bar, Western Australia


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group