Reply With Quote
It depends on the size of the map, speed of your computer, amount of memory, 32-bit vs. 64-bit version, and numerous other factors. Runtime is proportional to the cube of the image size so it can take a very long time for large images.
Wilbur is uber slow
Should it be taking 45+ minutes to use the river flow feature? I've been working on a new map all day (I admit it is pretty large-sized) but these rivers have kept me waiting for a few hours to get them right... is something just wrong with my computer or is Wilbur really this unbearable slow?
It depends on the size of the map, speed of your computer, amount of memory, 32-bit vs. 64-bit version, and numerous other factors. Runtime is proportional to the cube of the image size so it can take a very long time for large images.
short answer... most likely, but it depends what you mean by large. per pixel operations get slow very quick. you may also find that with such a large image the rivers will be fairly thin. depending on what you are trying to do they may not be to your taste.
Photoshop, CC3, ArcGIS, Bryce, Illustrator, Maptool
And on every 5th cycle it travels across the internet and makes Waldronate coffee -- he really likes coffee
Dollhouse Syndrome = The temptation to turn a map into a picture, obscuring the goal of the image with the appeal of cute, or simply available, parts. Maps have clarity through simplification.
--- Sigurd
If rivers are too thin Under the Incise Flow Options is River "Blur" I usually start at a 2.
And yes, I use a 3.5 quad for 64 bit with 6 Gigs (I am not joking) of high speed ram. I still cant run incise flow on a map larger than 4000x4000, without risk of complete does not return from the dead lock up.
Last edited by Lathorien; 05-24-2009 at 11:49 PM.
Oh man... well, I finished the map with the tiny rivers (I might go back and redo the rivers later, but for now... no more)... for reference it was a 6000x4200 pixel image at 100 ppi and I have a 2.6 quad with 4gig RAM.
What was the total time? just for reference purposes.
over 30 minutes for generating rivers once (I had to do it a few times due to my own stupidity)... I'm not sure of the exact time because I left after a half-hour to do something else.
LoL sounds about rightOriginally Posted by ironmetal250
yeah 6000x4000 isnt large its huge. problem is quadcore/ram/etc doesnt make much of a dent in these operations cause your limited to 2_4 processes... only real way to speed such up would be to use something like nvidias cuda... basically a small supercomputer in a graphics card case... problem is things need to be programmed to utilize it... the manifold gis system is the only system i've seen use it, and while i hate manifold... they have been getting some strong results (a geoprocess that takes 10 min to run took under 5 seconds in a test they did in ottawa at a conference...) seems like it may be the processing way to go... interesting none the less
Photoshop, CC3, ArcGIS, Bryce, Illustrator, Maptool
Posting Permissions
