Memory use in Photoshop

A
Posted By
ahall
Apr 2, 2007
Views
602
Replies
14
Status
Closed
I am editing some large scans in a Windows XP (32 bit)
system with 2gig.

Efficiency is running around 50%.

Would Photoshop CS2 be able to use more memory?


Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in comp.graphics.apps.photoshop…)

How to Improve Photoshop Performance

Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!

AM
Andrew Morton
Apr 2, 2007
wrote:
I am editing some large scans in a Windows XP (32 bit)
system with 2gig.

Efficiency is running around 50%.

Would Photoshop CS2 be able to use more memory?

You might want to read the section titled "Allocating memory above 2 GB with 64-bit processors" in
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=3322 71

Andrew
A
ahall
Apr 3, 2007
Andrew Morton writes:

Andrew> wrote:
I am editing some large scans in a Windows XP (32 bit)
system with 2gig.

Efficiency is running around 50%.

Would Photoshop CS2 be able to use more memory?

Andrew> You might want to read the section titled "Allocating memory above 2 GB with Andrew> 64-bit processors" in
http> www.adobe.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=332271

Thank you. It led me to information that on my computer, under 32 bit XP, the system can only use the 2gb I have. Saved me some money, but nonetheless, a disappointment as I would have loved to give PS the 3gb it can use.


Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in comp.graphics.apps.photoshop…)
N
noone
Apr 3, 2007
In article , says…
Andrew Morton writes:

Andrew> wrote:
I am editing some large scans in a Windows XP (32 bit)
system with 2gig.

Efficiency is running around 50%.

Would Photoshop CS2 be able to use more memory?

Andrew> You might want to read the section titled "Allocating memory above
2
GB with
Andrew> 64-bit processors" in
http> www.adobe.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=332271
Thank you. It led me to information that on my computer, under 32 bit XP, the system can only use the 2gb I have. Saved me some money, but nonetheless, a disappointment as I would have loved to give PS the 3gb it can use.
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in comp.graphics.apps.photoshop…)

The next best thing to usable RAM is Scratch Disk space/speed. If you have topped out on RAM, make sure that you have lots of big, fast (both disk and interface) HDDs. As of CS, PS can handle all that you could realistically use. Though I’ve got 4GB RAM (configured for best/most use with XP-Pro), I still have 3-500GB SATAII HDDs, just for Scratch Disk, but then I work on big- honking files all of the time. Just make sure that these are physically separate from your OS/Programs HDDs, and it’s also nice to keep Window’s Virtual Mem on a different disk from the others mentioned.

Were money no object, and connectivity not a problem, I’d probably add another. Instead, I just added 5TB of extra storage via Giga-bit LAN & FW and will be adding 1-750GB ATA-300 HDD for on-system image files.

Hunt
TE
Toke Eskildsen
Apr 3, 2007
wrote:

Thank you. It led me to information that on my computer, under 32 bit XP, the system can only use the 2gb I have.

The page says it can use 3GB for some systems, with a minor tweak:

"Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a 32-bit operating system, such as Windows 2000 and Windows XP Professional, it can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer.The operating system uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference displays only a maximum of 1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you are running Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up to 3 GB of RAM."

Toke Eskildsen – http://ekot.dk/
MR
Mike Russell
Apr 4, 2007
"Toke Eskildsen" wrote in message
wrote:

Thank you. It led me to information that on my computer, under 32 bit XP, the system can only use the 2gb I have.

The page says it can use 3GB for some systems, with a minor tweak:
"Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a 32-bit operating system, such as Windows 2000 and Windows XP Professional, it can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer.The operating system uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference displays only a maximum of 1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you are running Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up to 3 GB of RAM."

I’ve done this, and it works. The "RAM" in this case refers to address space. There is no need, other than performance, to have the actual RAM installed for Photoshop to be able to handle larger files.

Later documents imply that this may also work for XP home. Has anyone tried the /3gb switch with XP Home?

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com/forum/
R
ronviers
Apr 4, 2007
On Apr 3, 7:51 pm, "Mike Russell" <
MOVE> wrote:
"Toke Eskildsen" wrote in message

wrote:

Thank you. It led me to information that on my computer, under 32 bit XP, the system can only use the 2gb I have.

The page says it can use 3GB for some systems, with a minor tweak:

"Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a 32-bit operating system, such as Windows 2000 and Windows XP Professional, it can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer.The operating system uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference displays only a maximum of 1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you are running Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up to 3 GB of RAM."

I’ve done this, and it works. The "RAM" in this case refers to address space. There is no need, other than performance, to have the actual RAM installed for Photoshop to be able to handle larger files.
Later documents imply that this may also work for XP home. Has anyone tried the /3gb switch with XP Home?

Mike Russellwww.curvemeister.com/forum/

Hi Mike,

My interpretation of the /3gb switch was that it essentially software muxes the additional address lines in order to decode the higher memory causing multiple cycle latency for each memory access, not just the ones above 2GB, thereby introducing a performance hit across the board. I made the decision to let XP get what good it can from the added memory (I have 4GB) and invoke the switch only when I was forced to due to large file related delays- so far it has not been necessary..
Vista and some fast spinning SATAs like Hunt mentioned sounds like a better solution.
R
ronviers
Apr 4, 2007
On Apr 3, 4:13 pm, (Hunt) wrote:

Were money no object, and connectivity not a problem, I’d probably add another. Instead, I just added 5TB of extra storage via Giga-bit LAN & FW and will be adding 1-750GB ATA-300 HDD for on-system image files.
Hunt

Hi Hunt,
Do you use compression on any of your archive drives?
A
ahall
Apr 4, 2007
Toke Eskildsen writes:

wrote>
Thank you. It led me to information that on my computer, under 32 bit XP, the system can only use the 2gb I have.

Toke> The page says it can use 3GB for some systems, with a minor tweak:

Toke> "Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a 32-bit Toke> operating system, such as Windows 2000 and Windows XP Professional, it Toke> can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer.The operating system Toke> uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference Toke> displays only a maximum of 1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you Toke> are running Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set Toke> the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up Toke> to 3 GB of RAM."

Yes, but my system can only use 2gb under XP Pro. So I cannot take advantage of the /3gb flag that PS will use. This is a pity.


Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in comp.graphics.apps.photoshop…)
AM
Andrew Morton
Apr 5, 2007
wrote:
Toke Eskildsen writes:

wrote>
Thank you. It led me to information that on my computer, under 32 bit XP, the system can only use the 2gb I have.

Toke> The page says it can use 3GB for some systems, with a minor tweak:

Toke> "Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a 32-bit Toke> operating system, such as Windows 2000 and Windows XP Professional, it Toke> can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer.The operating system Toke> uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference Toke> displays only a maximum of
1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you Toke> are running
Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set Toke> the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up Toke> to 3 GB of RAM."

Yes, but my system can only use 2gb under XP Pro. So I cannot take advantage of the /3gb flag that PS will use. This is a pity.

Yes you can.
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/08/22/218527. aspx

Note that, just to complicate things, if you install 4GB of RAM then Windows cannot access all of it because of memory-mapped IO space for things like video cards. For example, if you have a video card with 256MB of RAM then that is mapped into the 4GB address space, meaning that 256MB of the system RAM is, effectively, hidden.

I suggest adding RAM in matched pairs if you have a motherboard which can access the RAM with dual channels.

HTH

Andrew
N
noone
Apr 6, 2007
In article ,
says…
On Apr 3, 4:13 pm, (Hunt) wrote:

Were money no object, and connectivity not a problem, I’d probably add another. Instead, I just added 5TB of extra storage via Giga-bit LAN & FW
and
will be adding 1-750GB ATA-300 HDD for on-system image files.
Hunt

Hi Hunt,
Do you use compression on any of your archive drives?

No. I’ve found that there is little data that be compressed out of my image files that way. Now, I do use compression for my TIFFs (LZW), but I assume that you mean HDD compression. For PSD, etc. I leave them otherwise alone.

Did I get your question correct?

Hunt
R
ronviers
Apr 7, 2007
On Apr 6, 3:46 pm, (Hunt) wrote:

No. I’ve found that there is little data that be compressed out of my image files that way. Now, I do use compression for my TIFFs (LZW), but I assume that you mean HDD compression. For PSD, etc. I leave them otherwise alone.
Did I get your question correct?

Hunt

I keep an archive ‘photo lib’ drive (USB) between (logically) my working ‘photo lib’ drive (Internal SATA) and my shelf of DVDs. Both of these drives are mostly redundant and contain uncompressed RAWs, TIFFs and PSDs. The archive drive is used only as a source for burning DVDs and is not speed dependent so I was thinking of compressing it. I was wondering if you do something similar just on a larger scale but is doesn’t sound like you have a need for it.

Thanks,
Ron
A
ahall
Apr 7, 2007
Andrew Morton writes:

Andrew> wrote:
Toke Eskildsen writes:
wrote>
Thank you. It led me to information that on my computer, under 32 bit XP, the system can only use the 2gb I have.
Toke> The page says it can use 3GB for some systems, with a minor tweak>
Toke> "Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a
32-bit Toke> operating system, such as Windows 2000 and Windows XP Professional, it Toke> can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer.The operating system Toke> uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference Toke> displays only a maximum of
1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you Toke> are running
Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set Toke> the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up
Toke> to 3 GB of RAM."
Yes, but my system can only use 2gb under XP Pro. So I cannot take advantage of the /3gb flag that PS will use. This is a pity.

Andrew> Yes you can.
Andrew> http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/08/22/218527. aspx

I must be writing very poorly. My system, a Dell XPS 600, cannot use more than 2gb due to a chipset limitation. I understand that on a system that does recognize 4gb, that Photoshop can use more than 2gb.

Andrew> Note that, just to complicate things, if you install 4GB of RAM then Windows Andrew> cannot access all of it because of memory-mapped IO space for things like Andrew> video cards. For example, if you have a video card with 256MB of RAM then Andrew> that is mapped into the 4GB address space, meaning that 256MB of the system Andrew> RAM is, effectively, hidden.

Andrew> I suggest adding RAM in matched pairs if you have a motherboard which can Andrew> access the RAM with dual channels.

Andrew> HTH

Andrew> Andrew


Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in comp.graphics.apps.photoshop…)
N
noone
Apr 7, 2007
In article ,
says…
On Apr 6, 3:46 pm, (Hunt) wrote:

No. I’ve found that there is little data that be compressed out of my image files that way. Now, I do use compression for my TIFFs (LZW), but I assume that you mean HDD compression. For PSD, etc. I leave them otherwise alone.
Did I get your question correct?

Hunt

I keep an archive ‘photo lib’ drive (USB) between (logically) my working ‘photo lib’ drive (Internal SATA) and my shelf of DVDs. Both of these drives are mostly redundant and contain uncompressed RAWs, TIFFs and PSDs. The archive drive is used only as a source for burning DVDs and is not speed dependent so I was thinking of compressing it. I was wondering if you do something similar just on a larger scale but is doesn’t sound like you have a need for it.

Thanks,
Ron

I do similar, with the DVD archives, and just fill up external HDDs with uncompressed files. As the prices of these hummers fall (I’m now buying 500GB units for what 100GBs were very recently), I just pick up a few more of them, and stick ’em on a shelf, as is. I’ve added a couple of 1TB units, but they are basically for my video files. Even with 1TB internal and 2TB on Giga-bit LAN, I still found that I needed more. I guess it’s correct, that old saw, "you can never have too much RAM, or HDD space… "

If you do try hardware compression on one of the externals, please keep notes on how it goes, and what improvements, i.e space compression, you get. I would be curious if it’s worthwhile. In the very old days, the compress/decompress was quite a bit slower, than straight reads from disks, but last time I did it was over a decade ago, so I suspect that it’s a LOT better now.

Good luck,
Hunt
J
Jim
Apr 7, 2007
wrote in message
Andrew Morton writes:

Andrew> wrote:
Toke Eskildsen writes:
wrote>
Thank you. It led me to information that on my computer, under 32 bit XP, the system can only use the 2gb I have.
Toke> The page says it can use 3GB for some systems, with a minor tweak>
Toke> "Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a
32-bit Toke> operating system, such as Windows 2000 and Windows XP Professional, it Toke> can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer.The operating system Toke> uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference Toke> displays only a maximum of
1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you Toke> are running
Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set Toke> the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up
Toke> to 3 GB of RAM."
Yes, but my system can only use 2gb under XP Pro. So I cannot take advantage of the /3gb flag that PS will use. This is a pity.

Andrew> Yes you can.
Andrew> http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/08/22/218527. aspx
I must be writing very poorly. My system, a Dell XPS 600, cannot use more than 2gb due to a chipset limitation. I understand that on a system that does recognize 4gb, that Photoshop can use more than 2gb.
XP can allow a the user portion of the 4GB virtual address space to become as much as 3 GB if you insert the /3GB switch in bootini. An application that is written such that can also access that much virtual address space will be able to take advantage of the increased virtual address space. Note that it may not be necessary to install RAM up to and including 3 GB to take advantage of this switch. The excess over what your system RAM furnishes and what the program needs always goes to the pagefile anyway.

Further, as PS does a lot of its own memory management, you may already be exceeding the normal 2 GB virtual user address space. The extra memory needed comes from the PS scratch area.
Jim
Andrew> Note that, just to complicate things, if you install 4GB of RAM then Windows
Andrew> cannot access all of it because of memory-mapped IO space for things like
Andrew> video cards. For example, if you have a video card with 256MB of RAM then
Andrew> that is mapped into the 4GB address space, meaning that 256MB of the system
Andrew> RAM is, effectively, hidden.

Andrew> I suggest adding RAM in matched pairs if you have a motherboard which can
Andrew> access the RAM with dual channels.

Andrew> HTH

Andrew> Andrew


Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in comp.graphics.apps.photoshop…)

How to Master Sharpening in Photoshop

Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections