Page 1 of 1

Autopano Pro 1.4.1 Beta starting

PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:36 pm
by AlexandreJ

A really quick message to post the first beta for the 1.4.1 version.
I will post the full log tomorrow, but now, I just want to share this version with you : a fully working 64bits for Windows XP and Vista.


Direct download link :

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 5:37 am
Fantastic! Great News! Have you seen any noticable difference in the performance of the 64-bit APP in Vista vs. Windows XP x64?



PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 8:55 am
by AlexandreJ
Some people reported a big increase in performance between 32bits and 64bits version. But I don't have any benchmark for vista 64 against xp 64bits.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 9:41 am
by beeloba
Bonjour Alex,
Est-ce que la version Mac sur laquelle vous travaillez est seulement incompatible Leopard, ou est-ce aussi le cas de Tiger ?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:52 am
by l_archi
Linux version ? :)

=> pour les benchmark : on pourrait pas avoir un fichier de log.. qui donne le temps exact de rendu et faire un pseudo ratio (nb de photos / taille /image) une sorte de bogo-mips, je sais pas si c'est très révélateur comme chiffre

Sinon 32bit => 64bit on doit gagner sur la transformation effectuée par l'os 4,5 % sans doute

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:18 pm
by fma38
Tout dépend : est-ce que la version 64bits d'APP est vraiment optimisée pour du 64bits, cà d utilise des variables 64bits, ou est-ce juste une optimisation du compilo ?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:58 pm
by klausesser
Bonjour Alexandre!

Do you intend to release a 64bit version also for Macs?

best, Klaus

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:33 pm
by [bo]
I have recently purchased a Q6600 + 4GB ram, running at 3.2Ghz and XP 64-bit. Right now I stitch with APP 32bit, so I can do a comparison of 64 and 32 bit, although I doubt there will be much improvement, as I don't do large panos (12-20 5D shots at most).

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:46 pm
by AlexandreJ
Notes :
- This is a true 64bits version. Many part are optimized for this size. We could do more and we'll do but not for this release. That is planned for v2.
- Mac compilation. This is a problem for us for the moment as the underlying UI framework we are using has not yet a good workflow for 64bits under Leopard. We need to study that more, but I don't think we can do much because it's the framework to provide us the right workflow, not us to find it. I don't think it will last long before we could do it. But for the moment, we cannot. 64bits Mac is only Leopard. I don't think Tiger supports 64bits.
- Linux compilation. That's easy. We did it before and it will be easy to it again. Our 64bits development server that died after harlem rendering is back and allow us to work again on this version.
- Benchmarking ! Yes, definitively. I was thinking of a 2 parts system : a benchmarking log system that would be available in the software ( computer details, speed, ram, cores, etc ) and a set of standard panorama that everyone could grab and test on their computer : a benchmarking panorama cases repository. This benchmarking kit with input images will be accessible to everyone to make their own test. This way, we could really compare configuration between them because we use the same images sets.
I propose that someone opens a thread about that idea on the future session, no ?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:22 pm
by klausesser
Hii Alex!

"64bits Mac is only Leopard. I don't think Tiger supports 64bits."

Tiger does - but not as widely as Leopard.

best, Klaus

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:47 pm
by DrSlony
Good idea Alexandre. I recommend a test pano with large input images so control point finding (geometric analysis) will take a while (and therefore more accurate benchmark), eg. 10MP. Output pano size also large for the same reason. It would be good if the whole benchmark would be done automatically by a script, and it would be good if this script along with source images would be downloadable separately from the main APP package, extractable to /benchmark relative to the main app dir.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 6:19 pm
by AlexandreJ
I studied Mac 64 bits support. It's really complicated because the Qt Framework will not support it soon :
* : Qt 4.5 not before, that's for end of the year.
* : behind the scene discussion to learn the why.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:39 pm
by gerardm
Yeah, That is apple's issue. There are lots of bugs in X11 in leopard too. Years ago, when the G5 was brought out as a 64 bit system, apple tooted their horn to no prevail. Are there any 64 bit apps for the mac (gui-less)?

Okay, I am throwing 800 pictures (16 bit tif )at the x64 version. Vista ultimate on the new 8 core mac pro. During detection, I had a peak memory Working usage of 7.959 gigs. Detection was set to high. I have 32 gb of ram in the system.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:32 pm
by LCarter
Thank you so much for this 1.4.1.

I'm very happy. :)

PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:28 am
by [bo]

PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:48 am
by beeloba
AlexandreJ wrote:I studied Mac 64 bits support. It's really complicated because the Qt Framework will not support it soon

Would it be possible to run APP 1.4.1 on a intel Mac core 2 duo, under Bootcamp/VMware fusion or parallel.
In that case, what would be the best windows version to use?

I'm just guessing…

PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:40 pm
by gerardm
Yes, It is possible. Vista has better memory management than Xp. From what I understand, The memory management has to do with memory cache and multiple cores. Vista, like Leopard has the ability to utilize memory better so that it doesn't swing from core 1 on a separate chip to core 8 on another. Each clock cycle looking for data in another place according to where each core gets its cache and bus to the ram.

It is also hardware related, for instance under tiger one could use 8 cores to render with shake. Apple posted a tip : , that states shake should only be set to a max of 4 cores in leopard. Obviously, Apple did not want to release another version of shake.

VM ware fusion works with win X64 either XP or Vista. There are different brands of Vista depending on how much ram you have in your system. At one point, there was also talk about Virtualization only being licensed using Vista ultimate.

Generally, Vmware fusion can only efficiently allocate about 1/2 your physical ram. I tried rendering a 60,000 polygon mesh with mental ray, which crashed maya-32bit. Using Fusion, I got it work, but my hard drive was in pain.

I'm not too clear how Fusion treats real ram, vs just caching everything to disk.

The question is weather of not the extra overhead room using x64-APP on a virtual X64 system will bring any assistance to your workflow.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:58 pm
by foundation
You'd have to run vista 64 or windows xp x64 inside of fusion or parallels.

I don't think you'll find any performance advantage from running 64 bits, in vmware fusion or parallels as all disk i/o has to be passed through to the mac os, which will slow things like smart blend and reading in the images considerably. Plus the main advantage of 64 bit is accessing more memory and vmware is limited to 8gb (and parallels I think less).

PostPosted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:09 pm
by beeloba
Thanks foundation and Gérard.

Would it be of any interest to boot on windows, via bootcamp, or to wait till the Mac version is out ?

PostPosted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:36 pm
by gerardm
Yes, That's the best way. The new mac pros come with all the drivers for x64 vista. I have mine configured to boot osx, fedora, and vista. Warning: make sure the fans are working properly. Apple has the fan running very low for noise reasons. This is in the firmware. Make sure the boot operating system can understand and talk to the mac motherboard so heat from heavy duty use does not cause premature hard drive and memory failure. For OSX, I use mscFanControl to cool the 2007 8-core mac pro. By default, it runs 10-20C warmer than the early 2008 version.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 9:41 am
by fma38
I don't think you'll fry anything, as processors have internal protections that shutdown them when temperature is too high (100°C).

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 2:30 pm
by DrSlony
AAA! Still no 64bit Linux version! AAA!

PostPosted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:29 pm
by votez
Why I can't find a linux version?

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:42 am
by phototrek
gerardm wrote:Yeah, That is apple's issue. There are lots of bugs in X11 in leopard too. Years ago, when the G5 was brought out as a 64 bit system, apple tooted their horn to no prevail. Are there any 64 bit apps for the mac (gui-less)?

Yes, there are numerous scientific 64bit GUI-less apps for the Mac. Just look at molecular modeling etc.

Developing QT using Carbon, even though the writing was on the wall that it won't be future proof, and then blaming Apple for dropping support of new features is kinda lame. What, you told us for years not to use thing technology and now you say you won't port it to 64 bit? Cocoa has been around for just as long as Carbon, and Apple has said from day one which to use.

This way, thanks to Carbon, QT is not only butt ugly (find a single Cocoa app that's as hideous as any QT based app) but also broken. If anyone is surprised they should learn about the underlying technologies.

PostPosted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 4:35 pm
by AlexandreJ
Some news on 64bits support for mac / Qt. Interesting read.