Hi David,

If that approach works for you, that's good --- however it definitely
doesn't work for me --- I combine images together for my art, and I
routinely look through and use images I took multiple years ago...

I suspect darktable works well for your workflow - or for a workflow where
you are usually spending most of your time looking at the results from a
single shoot or such...

for what I'm trying to do the digikam approach is *far* superior - to the
point where I'm now trying to figure out how I can get digikam and
darktable to play nicely together.

I'd rather be able to just use darktable though...   Although I'm not sure
whether supporting my workflow is enough of a priority for them --- and I'm
unfortunately not sure I want to spend my spare time developing darktable
instead of working on my art...  :-/

Warren



On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:33 PM, David Vincent-Jones <[email protected]>wrote:

> The way that one uses the system may play an important role in the
> performance question.
>
> I have a relatively small collection of around 16,000 images and my
> approach is to keep (in theory) all of my images selected on an inverse
> time basis (Folders>Pictures>%). Thus, as I add images my latest pieces
> are, so to speak, located and added on the top of the pile in plain view.
>
> Since I try not to 'break' the continuity of my storage, my memory (8
> Gb.) holds-up rather well. Searching/locating images or sets of images
> is also quite fast. The problems start to occur for me if I jump around
> in the data base and call individual folders (ie. breaking-up the
> continuity of my 'image stack'.
>
> Having all of ones images selected initially sounds counter intuative to
> an efficient operation but it appears to work on my hardware; I suspect
> it simply keeps the cache integrity better.
>
> David
>
>
> On 03/28/2014 09:35 AM, Pedro Côrte-Real wrote:
> > I have the same experience. If I understand how darktable works it
> > doesn't generate thumbnails on disk, just in memory and of course the
> > memory is limited. That memory is however later saved to disk so
> > regeneration isn't needed in small collections. In a big collection
> > it's possible that the memory isn't enough to hold all thumbnails so
> > you're constantly throwing away thumbnails you've already calculated.
> >
> > I've also noticed that the lighttable view is pretty unoptimized.
> > Refreshing it spends a bunch of time on sqlite and I get some
> > situations after import where the thumbnails show up and disappear and
> > then show up again. This could again be a bad interaction with the
> > cache, where a thumbnail that's already been calculated gets evicted
> > again. I believe this bug occurs when I scroll through a large
> > collection which is consistent with the cache getting thrashed.
> >
> > I think in general the lighttable view needs a good look at how to
> > optimize it for performance and the cache setup seems very strange to
> > me. The on-disk cache shouldn't just be a dump of the memory cache for
> > restarts, it should have a larger set of saved images that get pulled
> > to memory as needed. Invalidating the whole cache when you change the
> > maximum size of the image area also seems very strange to me.
> >
> > Pedro
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Warren Baird
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hi all
> >>
> >> I posted about this around a year ago - but haven't been following the
> list
> >> too much lately - I did a few quick searches, but haven't seen if a lot
> of
> >> progress has been made in this area.
> >>
> >> I have a few large collections of images - one of my tags hits almost
> 8000
> >> images.  When I search on this tag and scroll through the thumbnails,
> some
> >> thumbnails will show up instantly - but the majority of them will start
> out
> >> as a grey box and fill in progressively - a 10x7 thumbnail grid takes
> about
> >> 10 seconds to fill in.   This means that if I'm scanning through the
> >> collection looking for an image to use, it is *very* slow...   It seems
> that
> >> these thumbnails aren't being cached anywhere - if I restart darktable
> it
> >> seems to have to regenerate the thumbnails again.
> >>
> >> I recently installed digikam, since I need something to manage my video
> >> files, and I found that it handles this better - the initial display of
> the
> >> thumbnails is about as fast as darktable (maybe slightly slower) - but
> the
> >> thumbnails are saved - so after letting it work on my collection for a
> >> while, I can scroll through 100's of images and see the thumbnails
> appear as
> >> fast as I can scroll through the list...
> >>
> >> In 10s I could easily scan through about 500 thumbnails in digikam - it
> took
> >> more than 30s to do the same in darktable.  I've put videos of the two
> up at
> >> :
> http://www.synergisticimages.ca/Other/Darktable-Vs-Digikam/38033945_Jbmj5r#!i=3140923506&k=28N4HWW
> >> - both were operating off the same set of images off the same disk -
> >> although each package ordered the images differently so it wasn't
> showing
> >> the exact same set of files.
> >>
> >> Overall I prefer darktable a lot --- but when it comes to looking for
> images
> >> to use in my art, I might have to go back to digikam for now...
> >>
> >> Any ideas on config changes to improve this?
> >>
> >> Any plans for improvement in this area?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Warren Baird - Photographer and Digital Artist
> >> http://www.synergisticimages.ca
> >>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their
> >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Darktable-users mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
> >>
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > Darktable-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Darktable-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
>



-- 
Warren Baird - Photographer and Digital Artist
http://www.synergisticimages.ca
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Darktable-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users

Reply via email to