OpenGL3.3 on Luminar 4 - Windows 7

Answered

Comments

16 comments

  • Avatar
    Roy Blackwell

    Microsoft ended mainstream support for Windows 7 on January 13, 2015. Extended support ends January 14, 2020. Given this fact, not sure Skylum Support can help, but perhaps they can.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Angela Andrieux

    Hi Sury,

    If you are receiving the “OpenGL 3.3 and later is required for this application to run” error message when launching Luminar 4, please make sure your machine meets the minimum requirements listed here: http://prntscr.com/pvuyru 

    If you are not sure whether or not your GPU supports OpenGL 3.3 or above, please refer to its manufacturer's website. If your GPU does support OpenGL 3.3 and above, updating your graphics driver should fix this issue.

    Update Intel Graphics Drivers:

    https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/24345/Intel-Driver-Support-Assistant 

    Automatically update AMD Graphics Drivers:

    https://support.amd.com/en-us/download 

    Automatically update NVIDIA Graphics Drivers:

    http://www.nvidia.com/Download/index.aspx?lang=en-us 

    After you have updated your GPU drivers from the manufacturer’s website, make sure you set your discrete adapter to run Luminar 3 by default (usually this concerns laptops). Refer to your graphics card's manufacturer's website if you need help with that.


    If none of the steps above helped, please do the following:

    • Press the Windows logo key + R.
    • Type msinfo32 in the dialog box that opens and hit Enter on your keyboard.
    • In the window that opens, make sure you have System Summary highlighted on the left.
    • Click File > Export.
    • Type the name of the file and save it somewhere where you can easily find it and attach this text file to an email to support@skylum.com

    Looking forward to hearing from you.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Sury Maturi

    Thank you Roy and Angela. As far as I can see I meet all the system requirements. I have already provided the report to Skylum. Waiting for the support team to address my issue as I am informed they are swamped.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Angela Andrieux

    Hi Sury,

    Our team is quite busy, but if you let me know your email address I can check on the status of your support request.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Sury Maturi

    Thank you. My email address is bigsury@yahoo.com.

    With best regards,

    Sury

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Sury Maturi

    Angela,

    Any update?

     

    Sury

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Angela Andrieux

    Hi Sury,

    Our support team has responded via email. If I can do anything else to help please let me know!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Sury Maturi

    I still had problems with OpenGL3.3 though I replaced my graphics card (for other reasons) and the new one had latest version of OpenGL. I downloaded the latest version of the software and it seems to have fixed the OpenGl problem. Unfortunately, I cannot root cause the problem so that others can benefit but now after seven months of not able to use the software, I am excited to learn and use it.The issue can now be considered closed. Please let me know if I should respond to the email for the issue to be officially closed.

    With best regards,

    Sury

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Victoria Grace

    Hi Sury,

    Glad to hear you're up and running!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Wayne Holmes

    Strangely Luminar 4 does NOT actually need a GPU that is capable of OpenGL3.3!

    I have a nine year old Toshiba laptop which is not even completely compatible with OpenGL2.1, the Intel HD only supports about 90% of its features and for others will only run at 1fps (yes one!) when tested. So no way it will run Luminar 4, Right? 

    Wrong!

    However as noted elsewhere Luminar 4 will run perfectly happily on such a machine inside a virtual machine running a copy of windows. So just the hypervisor saying "Yeah we can do OpenGL3.3" to Luminar 4 is enough for it to work. So there is clearly NO hardware dependency on OpenGL3.3

    Secondly you can go the other, riskier, route and download a different copy of zlib1.dll and opengl32.dll from the internet (I am not going to say where though) and after thoroughly scanning for malware, copy them into the Luminar 4 program file. Again Luminar 4 starts up and runs perfectly on a computer that does not in anyway have hardware support for OpenGL3.3.

    So I am guessing the "Luminar needs OpenGL to gain parity to the Mac version" is utter nonsense given there are at least two ways to get it to run perfectly well and error free on hardware that absolutely does not support OpenGL3.3!

    What seems to be happening is that Luminar sends a query to the OS asking if it supports OpenGL3.3, if the system says yes then Luminar works. If it says no then Luminar throws an error message then randomly crashes. After altering the two files I mentioned I spent a day trying to get Luminar to crash or to find a function that didn't work and everything was just fine. By the way I am a certified software tester and a senior sysadmin on various Windows, Unix and Linux systems and have worked with computers for 40yrs so I know "bulls**t" when see it. And the OpenGL3.3 error message is a big steaming pile...

    That of course begs the question, what is the purpose of "needing" OpenGL3.3 when it clearly doesn't? Saying that Luminar needs a GPU supporting OpenGL3.3 is factually not true. Something being factually not true is technically the same as a lie. So why is Luminar telling lies about needing OpenGL3.3?

    It would be nice to get an honest reply.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Sury Maturi

    Wayne,

    I am not very conversant with the technical details, but Luminar would open but the main window would not display my picture being edited. I would edit save and check in LR5. I sent all the requested info. to support team. When I changed the graphics card due to a technicality (display died) and updated the graphics card drivers. Lo and behold, I am back in business. It took me about 7 months before I could use Luminar4 from the time of installation. Hope that explains my situation. But I am intrigued by your questions and would like to know the answer from an intellectual curiosity perspective.

     

    Sury

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Wayne Holmes

    Hi Sury,

    for me I could open Luminar and even open a NEF file. So far so good. As soon as I tried to do anything with it the dreaded OpenGL error message would appear, the picture would turn black and then Luminar would after a short but random interval then crash. 

    Now after tricking Luminar into believing my laptop is OpenGL3.3 capable (both using a VM or swapping the two dll's work), though it absolutely isn't, it works perfectly. I spent a whole day testing it, trying to get it to crash and trying to find any function that wouldn't work but everything was just fine. This leads me to believe Luminar only asks if the PC is OpenGL3.3 capable but does not in fact actually use the OpenGL3.3 functionality, the proof being tricking it into believing OpenGL is there would not help and at the very least some of Luminars functions would not work or would throw error messages. They don't, every function I tested worked perfectly. Even the speed was the same as I get with Capture One and Rawtherapee.

    It would be only a minor job for a single developer to alter the Luminar code with an IF, THEN, ELSE statement to redirect Luminar to a dummy dll if it can't find a real one. After all an obscure developer from Pakistan was able to work it out. Then again as Luminar apparently does not actually make use of OpenGL3.3 as far as my tests went, then why doesn't Skylum just disable this hardware query/requirement until Luminar actually does require OpenGL3.3? Crazy idea?

    So bearing all that in mind, what purpose is Skylum following by making Luminar crash when it can't find something it doesn't need? The mind boggles...

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Kate Williams

    Hi Wayne, 

    OpenGl 3.3+ is required by the hardware design. This feature is necessary for certain stages of the RAW file rendering and for speeding these processes up. Please keep in mind that the image in the main edit window is not cached, it's re-rendered each time you switch to the Edit tab / use Erase / Clone and Stamp tools, etc. 

    We cannot guarantee the smooth operation of the software on the devices that don't meet these requirements. Neither can we state with 100% confidence that the software will keep working smoothly with the workaround that you've implemented.

     

     

     

     

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Wayne Holmes

    Hi Kate,

    I think you maybe mean OpenGL3.3 is required by the software design?

    to quote you,

    "OpenGl 3.3+...  ...This feature is necessary for certain stages of the RAW file rendering and for speeding these processes up."

    also a quote from you,

    "Currently, the software relies mostly on CPU and RAM. We use GPU for some features, but not as extensively as we'd love to...  ...we hope to extend the use of high-level APIs for hardware acceleration, including the GPU one."

    I see a slight contradiction there somewhere...

    Anyway, I spent a whole day testing Luminar and looking for any problems. I would go through all the sliders and all of the styles one after the other and in various combinations tested various tools. Obviously if you know anything about software test you will know I only theoretically scratched the surface but it was the most common tasks that I went through. There was no slow down, no problems with rendering, no error messages, no crashes, nothing unusual at all. I had the same performance as I get from Capture one and Rawtherapee. That kind of disproves your statement.

    However given that it is possible to get Luminar running on machines out of spec by either using a VM (which just tells Luminar it is on more modern hardware) and by directly tricking Luminar into working with my method then why can't Skylum do what a single lone developer working in his free time in Pakistan could do? That is offer a workaround to at least get Luminar working. This is especially important for laptop users who can't upgrade a GPU.

    Does Skylum really have that much disdain for its customers that it can't offer a patch or minor upgrade to bypass the OpenGL requirement?

    It appears Skylum thinks not being able to "guarantee smooth operation" is worse than not being able to use the software at all?! Seriously? I don't understand why you want to shut out potential customers this way. In no place on this planet is that good business practice. Do you realise there is going to be a definite number of customers who run into this problem, see Skylum doesn't care and then they will write off your entire product range for the future. I was going to do the same as contempt for users is not something I am entirely happy with. Most of my work is done in Capture One but Luminar has a few neat things that it can do faster and more easily but it's no deal-breaker otherwise. Luckily I found a workaround that at least makes Luminar functional (I will see how reliability stacks up) which is a big improvement over "completely unusable".

    Seeing as Luminar clearly does not have a "life or death dependency" upon OpenGL3.3 and it chooses to leave people with non-functional software rather than solve the problem then I would say from my extensive IT experience that the Lead Developer needs either sacking or a stout kick in the backside.

    There is absolutely no excuse for this problem even existing in the first place. It would be a very minor task for even a junior developer to fix yet it has existed since at least Luminar 3. It would be interesting to hear what a representative from the developer team can offer as an excuse for this.

    At my last company (an IT consulting and software development company in Germany) a problem like this not being fixed to keep the customers working would have resulted in people getting disciplined or sacked by senior management. Then again those customers were major banks and German car manufacturers among others, not unimportant individuals wielding a camera...

    Sorry if I am coming over as being a bit aggressive but I don't understand how you can treat customers this way, harm your reputation and appear to not want to do anything about it.

    2
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Sury Maturi

    Wayne,

    I do see your point and it is valid. If there is no need for a requirement (sounds oxymoronic), then it should not there. Kate is stating that it is a requirement and you have established that it is not a requirement.

    I purchased the SW in Dec 2019 before itis released. I installed the software immediately after it became available but due to this issue could not use the SW and would have continued not using it, but for serendipitous change of my graphics card which had a HW fail. Even then new card did not work immediately till I updated the drivers. I did update my old card previously without any success. New card + updated drivers did the trick for me. From a customer point of view, it was disappointing that I could not use a product I purchased.

    On the other hand, the customer support team at Luminar was very prompt, professional and responsive in trying to help resolve my issue.

    With best regards,

    Sury

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Wayne Holmes

    Hi Sury,

    the responsibility for this situation lies with the developers and not the customer support team. Customer support only passes on what the developers tell them whether true or false.

    When I checked Capture One I found it uses OpenCL rather than simply OpenGL and even then you can switch off support for it for display and/or processing (needless to say my laptop doesn't support OpenCL) and the software remains fully functional if a little slower than it otherwise would be. It seems Lightroom/Photoshop has a similar option too (not sure if it is for OpenGL or OpenCL as I have not used the Adobe software since the early 2000's).

    Why can't Skylum do the same? I don't think we will get a satisfactory answer from anybody who actually knows why.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.