I have a similar system, except my grafic card ist a RTX3060. IT works with PL great for me. The issues are minor and I have learned to deal with IT. Enjoy your new Maschine. 
1 Like
Like I said, I was curious. I mean look at his setup. That’s £2k in the UK. It’s so far ahead of the minimum requirements that they are in a different time zone.
If you can’t run everything in PL9 on that, then all hope is done.
Which versions are you running (PL9.? and nVidia ?)
That’s a Nvidia card………………………. I have a good site for that. www.google.co.uk
PL9.3.2
Game Ready 591.44
1 Like
Thank you, but this is not a deep link.
Today I updated to 591.74. Still testing.
I’m using the latest Nvidia GPU driver and PL 9.3 something. In my experience, PL has been better for each version and with 9.3 I have no more problems-
1 Like
I used to have a similar mentality, but I don’t anymore. Like many others I haven’t had a good experience with Photolab 9. Without GPU acceleration, it’s utterly unusable, and with it, it crashes constantly, even doing basic things. I spent the money to upgrade to version 9, I have not taken advantage of any of it’s features really because that results in it crashing. I sent in a support ticket at the end of November, gave them all the info requested, and still it’s broken. I’m getting pretty upset with this, because we’re nearing the halfway point in the upgrade cycle, and currently all my $120 has gotten me, is a load of crashes, instability, and slightly different colour rendering that results in my presets not working. Oh, did I mention, having the audacity to apply a preset is one of the things that results in crashes. I can see why people would have absolutely no kind words for DxO. I strongly feel like they’re prioritizing features over stability, which is exactly the opposite of why I bought their software in the first place. I switched away from Lightroom because it was crashing constantly too. Meanwhile, now, Photolab is worse than Lightroom ever was, despite me spending $200 more than a Lightroom subscription for that time would’ve cost. Perpetual license is worth nothing if it’s a license to software that’s broken and doesn’t work properly. People will say “Well you just need a higher end machine.” Nah. Minimum spec should mean it runs, and works. Not that it crashes when you try to use all the features. So done with this. I’m not far from just going back to Lightroom, and I for sure won’t be recommending any DxO software again.
2 Likes
If I had been the DXO boss for for R&D I would have done the following:
Since the AI-premade presets in the drop down menu de facto need 16 GB I would have disabled the drop down meny for these AI-models all together for computers with GPU-cards with less VRAM than 8 GB and a card level lower that 3060 Ti. I know that card works with the direct freehand masking method without any problems. Doing so would remove a lot of expectations that can not be met with hardware that lacks the power to drive the other AI-methods
For those users I then would have recommended the users to use the freehand masking method instead in the manual. With that method even you will be able to perform anything really that you can do through the menu even with one big exception and that is that you will not be able to copy a AI-generated preset to a selection of pictures with similar motifs. That is in practice the only hard limitation. The others are in the heads of the users and those are impossible to do anything with without upgrading the hardware.
It would probably have been necessary too to pop up a screen after installation was finished that informed the user that his /hers present hardware (GPU) is not fully compatible with the most advanced AI-masking features in the program.
For those with card from the 4xxx and 5xxx-series Nvidia cards with 16 GB plus I would then open the full access to the premade AI-presets in the drop down menu.
Again: No problem with an 8GB GPU 3060 Ti or above as long as the user is fine adding masking to one picture at the time.
If the user demands to even be able to process more than one picture at the time even with AI-presets the hardware requirements are as presented above.
Every user has the possibility to try a 30 days trial - nobody needs to get fooled.
1 Like
I know this is an Apples / Oranges comparison, but I was able to use PL9 AI masks quite well using a M1 MacBook with just 8GB RAM. I could apply AI masks to multiple images and copy adjustments which saved a lot of time.
The big issue I had was with export, it would only manage one at a time and took hours to export a few hundred images.
This led me to upgrade to an M4 Mac mini which can handle 30 consecutive exports.
It is no problems exporting 30 pictures masked with the freehand nethod with my 3060 Ti 8GB either. The problem is to doing it using the premade AI-presesets.
2 Likes
What’s peculiar (still) to me is that my 1080Ti (11GB VRAM vs. the de facto 16GB you suggest above) can often (not not always) detect premade AI-presets without crashing or issues.
Just now I exported 6 images in a batch with no problem (granted, in this case not with premade AI masks). However, about an hour ago, I was struggling to export one image from that same batch above on its own. No changes to the photo edits were made between export attempts.
I still can’t see any rhyme or reason to the success or failure of my export attempts here.
“What the hell is going on?” continues…
2 Likes
There is a new Studio-driver 591.74 from the beginning of January now.
As sayed before. Never cards of a later generation also often has improved parallell processing and bandwith, so it is not just VRAM. It can also be a goog idea now to keep up with the driver updates. … and it is a long time since using the freehand method with 3060 Ti 8 GB was a problem, either to use and export with.
1 Like
I have the same export problems with an i7, an RTX 5060,
and 32GB of RAM! We restart the PC
(like back in the Windows 98 ) and the exports
go through without a hitch.
I almost always get a crash if I modify the optical
sharpening optimization in an AI mask.
What's certain is that version 9.4 doesn't bring any
improvement in this regard.
When will the major bugs be fixed?
- Élément
2 Likes
After 674 replies, it still seems that there is no good reason for me to spend money on v.9. Admittedly, I dont know what wonderful feratures I am missing, but I find v.8.12.0 perfectly stable and useable.
David
1 Like
Is that based on your personal experience or just based on the experience of those who continue to have issues? I am not having any significant issues with PL9 and am enjoying the over 20 new and updated features. If you have not done so already, I suggest you download and try out the free 30 day trial and find out for yourself if upgrading would be worthwhile for you.
Mark
6 Likes
Totally agreed Mark. Download the free trial of PL + FP + VP. Activate all of them and you’ve got thirty days to make up your own mind.
PL9 can be installed alongside PL8. Just don’t forget to create a test set of copy images, so that you can revert to PL8 at any time for your existing images.
2 Likes
If you try V9 and it works well on your PC / Mac, I’m quite sure you will regret not to have done it before. 
3 Likes
I have been using V9 since release and I am loving it. The subsequent updates until the current 9.4.1 kept refining it. AI masking is more and more accurate. I am very happy with that software. So I am sure some people have real issues but that should not imply this is bad software. In forums like here, mostly people with issues are writing comments. It is not the entire use base. But overall, from my experience, and I am sure most users, this software works great and keep improving.
1 Like