Page 1 of 1
Multithreaded post-processing (ICE)
PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:37 am
by toninikkanen
I scan 6x7 images with 3200ppi using ICE. Post-processing takes a LOT of time, and it seems it is only using one CPU (Task Manager in Windows XP says Silverfast is only using 50% of available CPU.) I have an Intel Core 2 Duo processor, and if ICE processing could be parallelized I guess post-processing time would decrease a lot. Are there plans for implementing this? Eventually I am going to get a quad-core processor because it'll speed up Photoshop even further than dualcore.
Btw, any chance of an Agfapan APX 100 NegaFix profile? It's a good German film, after all :)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 3:41 am
by RAG
toninikkanen,
I like your line of thinking, but unfortunately ICE is in the scanner not SilverFast. :(
Actually, I think it's partially software too...
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:45 am
by toninikkanen
RAG wrote:toninikkanen,
I like your line of thinking, but unfortunately ICE is in the scanner not SilverFast. :(
While an essential part of ICE is in the scanner, it seems to me a lot of processing is also done on the PC, as evidenced by Task Manager, where Silverfast is using 100% of one CPU for several minutes after the scanner has stopped making noises..
PostPosted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 5:59 am
by RAG
toninikkanen,
Good point regarding CPU utilization!
What I am getting at is that you cannot currently purchase an application (SilverFast or any other) that will provide ICE. Digital ICE is in the firmware of the scanner. If you have a scanner with Digital ICE there are applications such as SilverFast that communicate with Digital ICE. This is not to say that the addition of multi-processor support would not improve SilverFast performance over all.
By the way I experience similar performance using Epson's scanning software when using Digital ICE. As a result I only use Digital ICE when all else fails.
PostPosted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 6:13 am
by degrub
THe ICE libraries would have to be re-compiled at the very least. Until Kodak sees it as an issue, it won't happen. THere may also be algorithm issues with running the analysis in parallel. It may not be as trivial as one might think to get identical results.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:41 pm
by Tapotupotu
Maybe Windows Vista may help. I have on my PC both Vista and XP in seperate partitions. My scanner takes 20 minutes to post-processing under XP. In Vista it takes only 4 minutes with the same XP-drivers and same software ...
I never thougt off these advantage off Windows Vista. Because I do not much like it.