Please take a look at below stack. It renders completely incorrect using any method (A, B or C) and regardless whether I use DNG or TIFF. Advice? HF 6 renders it correctly.
Screen Shot 2018-09-29 at 14.03.48.png

** UPDATE: 7.0.2 does the same. Resetting the adjustment parameters work - but I am ...

When I render a DNG stack and try to save the output to DNG file I get this (yesterday it worked so not sure why it is now broken):

Process: HeliconFocus [31055]
Path: /Applications/HeliconFocus.app/Contents/MacOS/HeliconFocus
Identifier: com.heliconsoft.HeliconFocus
Version: 0
Code Type: X86-64 ...

That I cannot confirm as I sold it a couple of days after I got my iMac Pro so I cannot do another test.

Well that just made me incredibly happy as I was floored when I found out my new iMac Pro was slower with HF than my old Mac Pro 2013. Now the tables have turned. Thanks so much.

Not sure if I am missing something but HF 7 for Mac seems stupendously fast:

Old:
Mac HF 6.7.2 Method B, Adobe DNG Converter 10.2, 20 HT Cores, 128GB RAM
50 x TIFF: Run 1: 1min 55sec (one pass), Run 2: 1min 55sec (one pass)
50 x DNG: Run 1: 2min 58sec (one pass), Run 2: 2min 6sec (one pass)

New ...

Ah that makes a lot of sense, thanks.

I only allocated 16GB of RAM to the VM so that may have been it.

Will test the new 7.0.0 versions.

Hi Stas,

I think you misread my test results. Look at the first two sets of tests:

Mac HF 6.7.2 Method B, Adobe DNG Converter 10.2, 20 HT Cores
50 x TIFF: Run 1: 1min 55sec (one pass), Run 2: 1min 55sec (one pass)
50 x DNG: Run 1: 2min 58sec (one pass), Run 2: 2min 6sec (one pass)

Win HF 6.8.0 ...

Hi Stas,

I did some additional testing. Please see below. Very weird is that Parallels using 18 threads (leaving 2 for host machine) is twice as slow as Parallels with 10 threads (matching the actual core count) using your new version 7.0.0. I tried with and without adaptive hypervisor turned on ...

I thought I'd update you with the performance differences I saw.

I downloaded 6.8.0 and stacked 268 DNG images each 20.4MB and 20MP using method B, as well as the unreleased new version (On a mac stacking DNG is horribly slow but I do it for obvious reasons - stacking TIFF is way faster. On ...

Thanks, trying it now. What is the difference between the two Method B's? (depth map and legacy)

Might I get a copy of the Windows version? I am running Parallels and that would be so awesome!

I have just received my new iMac Pro 10 Core system. I also have a Mac Pro 2013 with 6 Cores. How is it that rendering a stack of 268 DNG files using method B, and Adobe DNG converter, takes 8min 55sec on the 6 core Mac Pro but 11min 12sec on the 10 Core iMac Pro with its much newer CPU (even though ...

Seems better, thanks!

Hi Stas,

When I am finished rendering a stack on my macOS Sierra Mac Pro 2013, the CPU usage of Helicon Focus always linger on about 400% on my 6 Core Xeon. Most of this is system CPU usage. I find this strange as the rendering is complete, and while nothing is happening in Helicon Focus the CPU ...

Why? I am using Adobe's DNG converter and it works perfectly on 6.5.2. I am not willing to switch to a different RAW converter - I'd rather stick to 6.5.2 for the rest of time :)

I stacked with 6.6.1 and 6.5.2 using DNG. For 6.6.1 the stack took 5:39. For 6.5.2 it took 4:23, thus 28% slower. See ...