Mark C wrote:
Your question made me curious. I don't use lightroom but I do use Zerene Stacker to focus stack images. Zerene reads an image into memory, layers it onto the working image that it is building, and then loads the next image. It also starts the process by quickly analyzing the whole set of images to assess if they are stackable. So there is a fair amount of both disk and processor work going on - I assume it reads each image twice, once for the initial assessment and once to actually layer it onto the stack. I took 33 compressed 16 bit TIFF from the K3 - about 5.3 gigabytes of images - and stacked them in Zerene Stacker using its PMax mode. In one run I put the files on the SSD (Samsung 850 Pro 512 gb) and one pass on the spinner (3 TB Seagate ST3000.) Both are SATA 600 devices. The result - the stack took 6 minutes even to complete when using the SSD, 5:58 to complete with the spinner. I'm not sure why the spinner is faster, though probably within the margin of error. I'm a little surprised. In synthetic benchmarks like Crystal DIsk Mark the SSD is 2x to 100x faster than the Seagate drive. This system boots a lot faster than the system it replaced. But, apparently reading the files is a trivial part of the task of stacking them. No idea how or if this would relate to LIghtroom performance, though.
I think it would more effect making previews, writing files to disk. Also tasks that write a lot to the catalog.
It depends on how good the cacheing is. -- Larry Colen [email protected] (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
