Liquify filter and memory problems

BF
Posted By
bob_frost
Feb 19, 2004
Views
803
Replies
12
Status
Closed
Why does CS keep giving me ‘memory problem’ dialogs when trying to alter a 100MB single layer image with liquify? On a PC with 2GB ram (have tried 50-80%) and a separate 10GB partition just for scratch files. No problem with small images.

Bob Frost.

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

DM
dave_milbut
Feb 19, 2004
what are your memory settings in prefrences. likely too high. lower to about 50% and try again… keep bumping it down until the filter runs.
BH
bryan_hughes
Feb 19, 2004
Hi Bob,

Can you tell me the exact dialogue that you’re getting? Also, any further details on the file itself?

Thanks, Bryan.
BF
bob_frost
Feb 19, 2004
Dave and Bryan,

Thanks for your replies.

The file is a simple 100Mb 8bit scan 360ppi psd.

The dialogue says ‘The operation could not be completed successfully. Not enough storage is available to complete this operation’.

I’ve just run it again at preference memory settings 75%, 70%, 65%, 60%, 55%, and 50%, closing and reopening CS after each change.

It now runs at 55 and 50%. Its very slow, taking about 15 secs to show the liquefy image and unveiling it square by square, but it does seem to do as much as I want without showing the storage dialogue box. I could have sworn that I tried it at 50% the other day; in fact I normally run it at about 50% otherwise my NeatImage plugin won’t run.

So why does CS need less memory, implying that Windows needs more, to run the liquefy filter?

Bob
SB
Scott_Byer
Feb 19, 2004
So why does CS need less memory, implying that Windows needs more, to run
the liquefy filter?

Liquify likes to allocate one chunk of memory for the image. Photoshop allocates it’s memory up front, to get as much contiguous as possible and be as efficient as possible. Unfortunately, an application can only have 2GB of address space total, and if Photoshop takes too much, Liquify’s request fails. This is a newer phenomenon, as on machines with less than 2GB of memory, there will usually be enough address space left over to allocate the chunk, even if it means that things page around a bit to accomplish that.

-Scott
BF
bob_frost
Feb 19, 2004
Scott,

Thank you again. This is starting to make sense.

So there is no point in adding another 2GB of memory (my MB takes 4GB max) since the plugins have to run in the 2GB max along with the memory that PS grabs to start. So if I put 4GB memory in and set PS to 50%, it would still only see 1GB? And if I set PS to 100%, it would take the 2GB, but there would not be any room left for plugins to run, despite the other 2GB that PS cannot see.

Is that correct? If so, you’ve just saved me from wasting a lot of money on more memory!

Bob Frost.
DM
dave_milbut
Feb 19, 2004
So if I put 4GB memory in and set PS to 50%, it would still only see 1GB?

yes

And if I set PS to 100%, it would take the 2GB, but there would not be any room left for plugins to run, despite the other 2GB that PS cannot see.

correct.
BF
bob_frost
Feb 19, 2004
Thanks Dave,

I’ll propagate this info on some of the other lists I frequent, since there is a lot of speculation and nonsense talked about this.

Bob Frost.
DM
dave_milbut
Feb 19, 2004
the basic limit is the 2 gig per app os limit (ps doesn’t support the /3gig switch) so everything falls into place from there.
SB
Scott_Byer
Feb 20, 2004
Although, my personal opinion is that it’s nice for the OS to have some breathing room, and given how cheap memory has gotten, I think the "sweet spot" on memory is probably 3GB at this point. I haven’t done enough personal testing to verify this, so take it for the guesstimate that it is.

-Scott
BF
bob_frost
Feb 21, 2004
Scott and Dave,

But for dual channel DDR memory to work fastest, it has to be 2GB or 4GB unfortunately! Not sure how big the performance hit is with 3GB.

After my problem with liquefy not running, I was doing some housekeeping on my hard disks and found some enormous temporary files that were orphaned. They were xxxxxxx_MVM_0.tmp, and there were two of about 5GB, yes – GB, and others of 0GB. After deleting them (which Explorer wasn’t very happy with), I put two and two together, ran the liquefy filter again and lo and behold, it writes new tmp files of the same type to various partitions. One reached 8GB after a lot of playing in liquefy.

So as well as liquefy needing its own memory outside CS’s allocation, it needs its own scratch files!! That is presumably why the dialogues I got said there were ‘storage’ problems rather than memory problems – saves writing a separate dialogue! Luckily I had masses of empty space for them.

That presumably also explains why liquefy takes about 15 secs to open with a 100MB file – it is writing these large tmp files – it starts at 1GB before I have done anything to it.

But it doesn’t take any notice of where one tells CS to put scratch files. Liquefy just puts them on any partition with space it seems. It does clear up after itself normally, unless it does terminate from lack of storage.

We live and learn.

Bob Frost
CB
christian_birkely
Feb 22, 2004
this is what im talking about, when i say that photoshop cs is more of an upgrade, than a full version..

You need to fix these bugs..

/CeeBee ( user since ps 4)
RK
Rob_Keijzer
Feb 22, 2004
user since ps 4

That can’t be. Having read your recent posts I think you were still an egg back then. Rob

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections