Topaz sneaks out Gigapixel AI update, 3X faster

[MauriceRR]

I tried with raw files, and it often works very well. However I'm surprise they don't offer a dng output instead of a flat tiff, I would appreciate à sort of ai demosaicing, with upsizing.

PS : the 22000px tiff  16b output limitations becomes to be annoying for very large format.

Anyway topaz is making a good job, I also tested jpg-to-raw, even if the name is maybe not well chosen, the soft is making à very good job for removing compression artifacts and color quantization from a random picture.

If Adobe published à lot of articles about nn, they seem to be slow and cautious about incorporate them in Adobe cc. They seem to be more focus on the general public than on pro and photographers.
I'm still waiting for ai demosaicing, which will become the new Nice step in raw développement workflow for photographers !

[JaapD]

Well, ‘faster’ may be nice but I would like to see that Topaz is applying ‘quality’ first. Still too much artifacts to be usable for professional and/or quality work. This is also applicable to the rest of the ‘AI’ pack.

Regards,
Jaap.

[kirkt]

I fed the app a full-sized (6000x4000px) Fujifilm X-H1 raw file, converted to 16bit TIFF in Raw Photo Processor.  Before the update to v 4.3.1, the enlargement to 2x took 17m13s.  After the update, the same procedure took 17m20s.  I'm going to guess the Mac version got no update in speed, even with the 1.3 GB update.  There is very little observable difference, if any, between the two images.  What is interesting is that if you use Apply Image ... Subtract with a scale of 2 and an offset of 128 between the two images you can visualize the areas of difference - more importantly, you can see a distinct grid pattern across the image, perhaps the tiles that the app uses to process the image?

Maybe one day the application will use both GPUs in my trashcan MacPro....

kirk

(the attached screenshot has had a very heavy curve applied to the difference image to make the results more easily visible).

[JaapD]

The latest Gigipixel AI update (performed at 04-sep-2019) crashes during installation. Rebooting and/or re-installation did not resolve this. This occurs on a Win7-64 system. All updates in the past went flawlessly by the way.

Since there is no roll back functionality implemented, nor is it possible to download a previous working release from Topaz, I’m now stuck with a non-functioning Gigapixel.

I’ve initiated a support case, no feedback from Topaz yet.

So be warned…..

Regards,
Jaap.

[Alan Goldhammer]

The latest Gigipixel AI update (performed at 04-sep-2019) crashes during installation. Rebooting and/or re-installation did not resolve this. This occurs on a Win7-64 system. All updates in the past went flawlessly by the way.

Since there is no roll back functionality implemented, nor is it possible to download a previous working release from Topaz, I’m now stuck with a non-functioning Gigapixel.

I’ve initiated a support case, no feedback from Topaz yet.

So be warned…..

Regards,
Jaap.

It's likely a Windows 7 related problem and perhaps the new version has a conflict with some Win 7 DLLs that has not been addressed.

While this won't help your current problem, it does point out the necessity of doing an OS drive image on a weekly basis so that you can recover your system drive and associated programs prior to a failed installation.  Most of the software solutions that do system imaging can be configured to do such backups and I usually retain six weeks worth just in case.  Fortunately, I've not had to reimage yet (Windows 10 OS).

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

It's likely a Windows 7 related problem and perhaps the new version has a conflict with some Win 7 DLLs that has not been addressed.

Yes, could very well be. Make sure the latest DirectX drivers are installed, and the latest Graphics card drivers.

This latest version release focuses on speed-ups that depend on tweaking CPU/GPU processing and potentially 6th - 10th generation Intel CPU/GPU acceleration. Older or different (e.g. AMD) configurations might or might not be negatively affected. We're at the forefront of processing capability with Gigapixel AI, so Win7 is not ideal.

Also, does crashing still occur when restarting the application? I too experienced an application crash during beta-testing, but subsequent application starts after the initial crash were fine.

Cheers,
Bart

[JaapD]

Hi Alan, Bart, thank you both for your reply.

In the end the root cause might or might not be related to Win7. That’s now under investigation at Topaz. However if Topaz wants to release a Win7 compatible product then this Win7 environment is with all its limitations the source to work from.

Yes, I do make a weekly image of the OS disk and its programs while the data is stored elsewhere. Only in critical situations I revert back to a weekly old system configuration, not for something like a failing Gigapixel install.

I mentioned the missing roll back functionality and I must say that Topaz supported me today by providing me a link to an installer of a previous working release. Kudos to Topaz!

It’s good to be aware that the installation procedure itself fails, not the execution of the program. So there is not yet a call from Gigapixel to the various drivers. My Win7 release (Intel i7 CPU) is up to date and so is my Nvidia driver for the GTX1070ti card. The crashing occurs each and every time I run the installer. Re-booting doesn’t change this situation. I never had any installation issues with Gigapixel, JPEGtoRAW, Denoise or Sharpen AI’s.

Let’s see and wait what Topaz support comes up with. Just for fun I’ll share the by the installer generated error with you, see the attachment.

Regards,
Jaap.

[earlybird]

I still run Win7 Pro x64 on an aging laptop, and while I do not think the latest GigaPizel AI runs any faster for me, it sure is nice to know that it has been coded to use my CPU to its full potential.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I still run Win7 Pro x64 on an aging laptop, and while I do not think the latest GigaPizel AI runs any faster for me, it sure is nice to know that it has been coded to use my CPU to its full potential.

Yes, that's a familiar look, using all power it is allowed to get.

[earlybird]

It seems like a lot of performance oriented apps are written to exploit the parallel processing on a GPU while leaving several, if not most of the main CPU cores idle.

It was reassuring to learn that this GigaPixel uses what is available.

[Jim Kasson]

I still run Win7 Pro x64 on an aging laptop, and while I do not think the latest GigaPizel AI runs any faster for me, it sure is nice to know that it has been coded to use my CPU to its full potential.

I don't see that on my workstation:

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I don't see that on my workstation:

If you open the Resource Monitor, at the bottom of the TaskManager's Performance tab in Win10, you can see the utilization of individual CPU cores. I get 8 individual charts for the 4 cores + hyperthreading of my CPU processor.

In general, that's a useful thing to watch whether the CPU's are slowing down the task, and/or if the GPU is doing its thing.

The latest Gigapixel AI allows to tweak some parameters as well, but that is easiest tested by trying the different settings in preferences and timing the total operation for 1 test image.

[Jim Kasson]

If you open the Resource Monitor, at the bottom of the TaskManager's Performance tab in Win10, you can see the utilization of individual CPU cores. I get 8 individual charts for the 4 cores + hyperthreading of my CPU processor.

While true, I think that's beside the point of my post, which showed aggregate CPU usage over time for all 16 physical cores and 32 hyper threaded "cores" of my workstation.

My problem with looking at 32 individual charts all at once with no time component, just 32 bar charts dancing up and down is that I can't see the forest for the trees. When I use some programs like Helicon and use the parallel processing toolbox in Matlab with the right programs, I can see the aggregate CPU usage go to 100%.

I will look at the options in GigaPixel AI. Maybe it is refusing to use more than a set number of cores.

Jim

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I will look at the options in GigaPixel AI. Maybe it is refusing to use more than a set number of cores.

It might also mean that your box is faster than the application can schedule subsequent sub-tasks, so some cores have to wait for other processes to finish.

Cheers,
Bart

[Jim Kasson]

It might also mean that your box is faster than the application can schedule subsequent sub-tasks, so some cores have to wait for other processes to finish.

When I tell it to be aggressive about GPU usage, it uses about all the cycles available, and it runs faster. It uses relatively few CPU cycles.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

When I tell it to be aggressive about GPU usage, it uses about all the cycles available, and it runs faster. It uses relatively few CPU cycles.

Looking pretty decent! (as far as one could hope) !

[John Hollenberg]

I tested on a 16 bit TIFF file from Lightroom from a Sony A7r2 ( 7952 X 5304) with 2X enlargement. 

With CPU with Intel Optimizations: 21 minutes 40 seconds
With GPU: 6 minutes 40 seconds

However, the colors of the poppies in the shot are noticeably different when stacked in Photoshop.   

For example:

L * - 68   68
a* - 48    49
b* - 86    100

I haven't tried to determine yet which match the colors in the original shot.  I see some difference in detail as well with the CPU processed shot being a bit sharper.  I don't know whether my video card drivers not being up to date could be the problem. I am on Windows 10 with latest update, card is Nvidia Geforce GTX970.

[earlybird]

Thanks for posting the interesting information.

[Jim Kasson]

I tested on a 16 bit TIFF file from Lightroom from a Sony A7r2 ( 7952 X 5304) with 2X enlargement. 

With CPU with Intel Optimizations: 21 minutes 40 seconds
With GPU: 6 minutes 40 seconds

I gave it a try with an a7RII image and the same 2x setting.

With NVIDIA P5000 GPU: 4:50.
GPU disabled (still used 43% of GPU 3D cycles, though): 8:32.

CPUs: two Intel Xeon 6144.

Jim

[John Hollenberg]

I gave it a try with an a7RII image and the same 2x setting.

With NVIDIA P5000 GPU: 4:50.
GPU disabled (still used 43% of GPU 3D cycles, though): 8:32.

CPUs: two Intel Xeon 6144.

I should have mentioned CPU - Intel Core i7 6700 at 4.0 GHz.  Did you see any color shift or difference in detail at 100% between the two methods?  I noticed it immediately when I stacked them in Photoshop and turned the top layer off and on.  That part is puzzling to me.  I checked to make sure they both had the originally assigned profile, both did.