What computer to easily process D800 files?

Started 9 months ago | Discussions
RomanJohnston
Forum ProPosts: 18,394Gear list
Like?
Basics....
In reply to hajagosb, 8 months ago

Your current computer sounds (hardware wise) more than enough to do the job.

i7 is a bit of overkill unless your editing videos.

16gb of ram is overkill. (8 gigs is the sweet spot)

I would back up all your stuff you have on your computer on an external drive

I would then perform a restore for the Operating System I rebuild my system every 6 months or so.

Buying a hard driver for backup is a lot cheaper.

I think you might be surprised.

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PhotoKaz
Regular MemberPosts: 252Gear list
Like?
Re: I'm using a Mac pro from 2006 and it inhales D800e files with no problem
In reply to The Andy G, 8 months ago

The Andy G wrote:

Hi:

This is a non-issue.

Mac Pro or Macbook Pro?  Both came with 1GB of memory as standard in 2006 so unless yours was a custom build I'm having a hard time with your "no problem" statement.

-- hide signature --
 PhotoKaz's gear list:PhotoKaz's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PhotoKaz
Regular MemberPosts: 252Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to RomanJohnston, 8 months ago

RomanJohnston wrote:

Your current computer sounds (hardware wise) more than enough to do the job.

i7 is a bit of overkill unless your editing videos.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2012/-33-Adobe-Photoshop-CS-6,3169.html

i7 is faster, so it you want better performance get a better CPU. You get what you pay for, no overkill here.

16gb of ram is overkill. (8 gigs is the sweet spot)

I disagree here. If you start working with D800 files in PS, add a few layers or create panoramas you need memory. RAM is cheap, I would say 16GB is the absolute minimum these days.

I would back up all your stuff you have on your computer on an external drive

Unless you automate the backup to the drive and take the drive off-site, this is not a good backup strategy. I posted a better strategy here: http://photokaz.com/2012/06/home-computer-backup-strategy/

I would then perform a restore for the Operating System I rebuild my system every 6 months or so.

Why? This is not necessary.

Buying a hard driver for backup is a lot cheaper.

And ineffective unless managed correctly, which no one ever does.

I think you might be surprised.

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

-- hide signature --
 PhotoKaz's gear list:PhotoKaz's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RomanJohnston
Forum ProPosts: 18,394Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to PhotoKaz, 8 months ago

I am a technician by trade and I am responsible for benchmarking PC's and handling hardware requests that come in. Researching the customers need. One of our benchmarks is Photoshop AND I own a D800. I think I have a handle on what I just told this person. I do this for a living day in day out.

I have an old 4x Phenom II 905e (the power saving processer) with 8 GB of ram and a simple Quadro 600 video card running 64bit Windows 7. That is probably less than this person has in his laptop in question...and I have zero problem running D800 files including multi layer 6 and 7 stitch panos.

Roman

PhotoKaz wrote:

RomanJohnston wrote:

Your current computer sounds (hardware wise) more than enough to do the job.

i7 is a bit of overkill unless your editing videos.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2012/-33-Adobe-Photoshop-CS-6,3169.html

i7 is faster, so it you want better performance get a better CPU. You get what you pay for, no overkill here.

16gb of ram is overkill. (8 gigs is the sweet spot)

I disagree here. If you start working with D800 files in PS, add a few layers or create panoramas you need memory. RAM is cheap, I would say 16GB is the absolute minimum these days.

I would back up all your stuff you have on your computer on an external drive

Unless you automate the backup to the drive and take the drive off-site, this is not a good backup strategy. I posted a better strategy here: http://photokaz.com/2012/06/home-computer-backup-strategy/

I would then perform a restore for the Operating System I rebuild my system every 6 months or so.

Why? This is not necessary.

Buying a hard driver for backup is a lot cheaper.

And ineffective unless managed correctly, which no one ever does.

I think you might be surprised.

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PhotoKaz
Regular MemberPosts: 252Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to RomanJohnston, 8 months ago

You are not the only person in IT, and we do benchmarking in our company as well.  At the end of the day we can both state our opinion and let the OP decide for themselves.

Telling anyone in 2013 to run 8GB of RAM is just silly in my opinion.  Memory is so cheap and every new OS and app that comes along uses more memory than the version before.  I consider 16GB the minimum today for photo editing.  You can get by fine with 8GB but why limit it when you can double it for peanuts?  I too have a D800 and this is based on my own personal experience not random speculation.

Also, if you are an experienced IT tech I would expect you to recommend a better backup strategy than a simple external hard drive.  That simply protects you from a drive failure in your computer, but unless you have multiple external drives and swap take them off-site, or combine it with some type of cloud solution you don't have much security for any issues such as fire, flood, theft, etc.

RomanJohnston wrote:

I am a technician by trade and I am responsible for benchmarking PC's and handling hardware requests that come in. Researching the customers need. One of our benchmarks is Photoshop AND I own a D800. I think I have a handle on what I just told this person. I do this for a living day in day out.

I have an old 4x Phenom II 905e (the power saving processer) with 8 GB of ram and a simple Quadro 600 video card running 64bit Windows 7. That is probably less than this person has in his laptop in question...and I have zero problem running D800 files including multi layer 6 and 7 stitch panos.

Roman

PhotoKaz wrote:

RomanJohnston wrote:

Your current computer sounds (hardware wise) more than enough to do the job.

i7 is a bit of overkill unless your editing videos.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2012/-33-Adobe-Photoshop-CS-6,3169.html

i7 is faster, so it you want better performance get a better CPU. You get what you pay for, no overkill here.

16gb of ram is overkill. (8 gigs is the sweet spot)

I disagree here. If you start working with D800 files in PS, add a few layers or create panoramas you need memory. RAM is cheap, I would say 16GB is the absolute minimum these days.

I would back up all your stuff you have on your computer on an external drive

Unless you automate the backup to the drive and take the drive off-site, this is not a good backup strategy. I posted a better strategy here: http://photokaz.com/2012/06/home-computer-backup-strategy/

I would then perform a restore for the Operating System I rebuild my system every 6 months or so.

Why? This is not necessary.

Buying a hard driver for backup is a lot cheaper.

And ineffective unless managed correctly, which no one ever does.

I think you might be surprised.

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

-- hide signature --
 PhotoKaz's gear list:PhotoKaz's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biological_Viewfinder
Senior MemberPosts: 1,193
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to PhotoKaz, 8 months ago

PhotoKaz wrote:

You are not the only person in IT, and we do benchmarking in our company as well. At the end of the day we can both state our opinion and let the OP decide for themselves.

Telling anyone in 2013 to run 8GB of RAM is just silly in my opinion. Memory is so cheap and every new OS and app that comes along uses more memory than the version before. I consider 16GB the minimum today for photo editing. You can get by fine with 8GB but why limit it when you can double it for peanuts? I too have a D800 and this is based on my own personal experience not random speculation.

Also, if you are an experienced IT tech I would expect you to recommend a better backup strategy than a simple external hard drive. That simply protects you from a drive failure in your computer, but unless you have multiple external drives and swap take them off-site, or combine it with some type of cloud solution you don't have much security for any issues such as fire, flood, theft, etc.

I keep my backup drives in my house, in a fire-safe. There's no way in hell I'm trusting *ANY* of my files to a company with their vague cloud references while I wait for their server farms to get breached by some hacker bent on showing how smart he is and how vulnerable we are. Um, no.

The rest of what you say is spot on. That guy might be in IT for broke people, but anyone who enjoys post-processing won't be happy with a limited setup when it's really not that much more for more.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PhotoKaz
Regular MemberPosts: 252Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to Biological_Viewfinder, 8 months ago

Biological_Viewfinder wrote:

PhotoKaz wrote:

You are not the only person in IT, and we do benchmarking in our company as well. At the end of the day we can both state our opinion and let the OP decide for themselves.

Telling anyone in 2013 to run 8GB of RAM is just silly in my opinion. Memory is so cheap and every new OS and app that comes along uses more memory than the version before. I consider 16GB the minimum today for photo editing. You can get by fine with 8GB but why limit it when you can double it for peanuts? I too have a D800 and this is based on my own personal experience not random speculation.

Also, if you are an experienced IT tech I would expect you to recommend a better backup strategy than a simple external hard drive. That simply protects you from a drive failure in your computer, but unless you have multiple external drives and swap take them off-site, or combine it with some type of cloud solution you don't have much security for any issues such as fire, flood, theft, etc.

I keep my backup drives in my house, in a fire-safe. There's no way in hell I'm trusting *ANY* of my files to a company with their vague cloud references while I wait for their server farms to get breached by some hacker bent on showing how smart he is and how vulnerable we are. Um, no.

The rest of what you say is spot on. That guy might be in IT for broke people, but anyone who enjoys post-processing won't be happy with a limited setup when it's really not that much more for more.

I'm not saying that backup drives are bad, just that they are bad for the majority of people.  I have seen it too many times where people buy an external drive with the best of intentions but never follow through with backups.  Most people don't set things up to be automated, and rely on manual backups.  Unfortunately, most people also don't have the discipline to maintain a manual backup strategy.

To me, you need to combine automation with off-site backups.  I like to make it as easy as possible, and just use BackBlaze for off-site.  I also back up to a NAS in my house, just so I can restore quickly if I have a major failure in my computer (though using RAID-5 means I need more than one disk to fail).

If you are managing backups and storing your drives in a fire safe you are well ahead of most.  However, is your safe also watertight?  Not sure if you could ever have a flood.  What about theft?  can anyone walk away with your safe and all contents?

As for cloud, the services are plenty safe.  I use gmail for my email which means Google has access to all of my mail.  I use iCloud to back up my iOS devices, which means Apple has all of the info on those devices.  I post photos on flickr, 500px, etc.  I have embraced cloud for many things, and don't feel exposed.

For BackBlaze, you can use your own encryption key before uploading your files which makes it more secure.  If you don't trust companies to store your files that is fine, but these days everything is going that route.

-- hide signature --
 PhotoKaz's gear list:PhotoKaz's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RomanJohnston
Forum ProPosts: 18,394Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to PhotoKaz, 8 months ago

PhotoKaz wrote:

You are not the only person in IT, and we do benchmarking in our company as well. At the end of the day we can both state our opinion and let the OP decide for themselves.

Well you challenged me. I just made my post to the person you opened this dialogue between us....I know I am not the only person in IT...I just know I am the person directly responsible for the benchmarking and know what my results are. You say your company "does benchmarking" that is quite different from being the person that actually tasked with the work.

I also know people want one thing and often NEED another....you know...the big eyes that want the best despite what the numbers and testing say. 

Telling anyone in 2013 to run 8GB of RAM is just silly in my opinion. Memory is so cheap and every new OS and app that comes along uses more memory than the version before. I consider 16GB the minimum today for photo editing. You can get by fine with 8GB but why limit it when you can double it for peanuts? I too have a D800 and this is based on my own personal experience not random speculation.

Again...the testing...not the price of ram....run my decisions and recommendations.

Also, if you are an experienced IT tech I would expect you to recommend a better backup strategy than a simple external hard drive. That simply protects you from a drive failure in your computer, but unless you have multiple external drives and swap take them off-site, or combine it with some type of cloud solution you don't have much security for any issues such as fire, flood, theft, etc.

I was not recommending a full backup strategy. This person never even broached the subject. Now your just puffing your chest and trying to make yourself look "right". I only addressed they way to handle my recommendations.

In short...the OP stated a very capable machine that seemed not to be performing up to the standards that are already capable of working with D800 files. I merely offered an option that didn't require buying much if not anything. No reason to spend money if your current hardware is more than capable.

Roman

RomanJohnston wrote:

I am a technician by trade and I am responsible for benchmarking PC's and handling hardware requests that come in. Researching the customers need. One of our benchmarks is Photoshop AND I own a D800. I think I have a handle on what I just told this person. I do this for a living day in day out.

I have an old 4x Phenom II 905e (the power saving processer) with 8 GB of ram and a simple Quadro 600 video card running 64bit Windows 7. That is probably less than this person has in his laptop in question...and I have zero problem running D800 files including multi layer 6 and 7 stitch panos.

Roman

PhotoKaz wrote:

RomanJohnston wrote:

Your current computer sounds (hardware wise) more than enough to do the job.

i7 is a bit of overkill unless your editing videos.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2012/-33-Adobe-Photoshop-CS-6,3169.html

i7 is faster, so it you want better performance get a better CPU. You get what you pay for, no overkill here.

16gb of ram is overkill. (8 gigs is the sweet spot)

I disagree here. If you start working with D800 files in PS, add a few layers or create panoramas you need memory. RAM is cheap, I would say 16GB is the absolute minimum these days.

I would back up all your stuff you have on your computer on an external drive

Unless you automate the backup to the drive and take the drive off-site, this is not a good backup strategy. I posted a better strategy here: http://photokaz.com/2012/06/home-computer-backup-strategy/

I would then perform a restore for the Operating System I rebuild my system every 6 months or so.

Why? This is not necessary.

Buying a hard driver for backup is a lot cheaper.

And ineffective unless managed correctly, which no one ever does.

I think you might be surprised.

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RomanJohnston
Forum ProPosts: 18,394Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to Biological_Viewfinder, 8 months ago

Biological_Viewfinder wrote:

PhotoKaz wrote:

You are not the only person in IT, and we do benchmarking in our company as well. At the end of the day we can both state our opinion and let the OP decide for themselves.

Telling anyone in 2013 to run 8GB of RAM is just silly in my opinion. Memory is so cheap and every new OS and app that comes along uses more memory than the version before. I consider 16GB the minimum today for photo editing. You can get by fine with 8GB but why limit it when you can double it for peanuts? I too have a D800 and this is based on my own personal experience not random speculation.

Also, if you are an experienced IT tech I would expect you to recommend a better backup strategy than a simple external hard drive. That simply protects you from a drive failure in your computer, but unless you have multiple external drives and swap take them off-site, or combine it with some type of cloud solution you don't have much security for any issues such as fire, flood, theft, etc.

I keep my backup drives in my house, in a fire-safe. There's no way in hell I'm trusting *ANY* of my files to a company with their vague cloud references while I wait for their server farms to get breached by some hacker bent on showing how smart he is and how vulnerable we are. Um, no.

I totally agree. Myself I have a Drobo in house and a drive I keep an outside location (work) that I bring home weekly and update with my RAW files. Don't trust the cloud....AND if I have no access to the internet I am also screwed. But the OP never asked about backup...just performance needed and reccomendations.

The rest of what you say is spot on. That guy might be in IT for broke people, but anyone who enjoys post-processing won't be happy with a limited setup when it's really not that much more for more.

IT for broke people? How about not spending money when it is not needed? Or are you in the habit of spending money when it is not needed. I am about the numbers...pure and simple. Get as much done with as small an expenditure as possible. Usually a mandate with ANY IT shop. Show me a business that wants ANY of its money to be spent without a reason or benefit and I will show you a business that is on its way to not being a business.  

I am not in the business to catering to peoples egos. Everybody thinks they need the greatest and best....and the newest. Especially in America where we are "trained" to be consumers. I benchmark and make recommendations based on that. Not interested in what is "ooooh...shiny" just interested in "what gets the job done" with the least amount of money spent. I know its an unpopular option when "ooooh shiny" rules. 

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
anotherMike
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,726
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to RomanJohnston, 8 months ago

I'm kinda with Roman on this one. There has been this fear that the D800 requires a rack of server blades to process files, that has gotten a bit out of hand. I've got pretty deep experience in the IT/Software field as well, and I'm managing quite fine with a 3+ year old ASUS running 9gig of RAM and a mid line i7 processor. Now, if I were running a event or wedding biz and needed faster processing, sure, upgrading to the latest and getting SSD drives and a faster video card would make sense, but for my general purpose studio and landscape work, I'm fine.

On the topic of backups, I take a proactive approach: I *expect* all hard drives to fail; always a matter of when, not "if". All images are stored on externals and backed up to portables. Any image I have is in at least three places: the primary external and a pair of portable drives. In cases where I deem the images important, they go on a 3rd portable drive to the safe deposit box. I don't fully trust the cloud, and the bandwidth neccessary to take an entire shoot of D800E NEF files to the cloud is beyond my capabilities or desires. Since I expect drives to fail, I replace all externals on a 2 year basis whether they need to or not; so there is always an ongoing drive rotation going on. Disk space is frankly CHEAP compared to the tens of thousands spent on the cameras and particularly the high end lenses (which is why I just don't get why anyone would get a D600 over the superior 800 because they are scared of the file sizes...)

At some point I might consider a RAID 10 based system, but at this time the cost/benefit ratio isn't making sense for me. So at the end of the day I tend to agree with Roman; one doesn't have to go to the very latest, prettiest, trendy computer to process D800 files. I think it depends on how much volume one is expecting to process more than anything else.

But there are many ways to skin a cat.

-m

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biological_Viewfinder
Senior MemberPosts: 1,193
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to RomanJohnston, 8 months ago

RomanJohnston wrote:

IT for broke people? How about not spending money when it is not needed? Or are you in the habit of spending money when it is not needed. I am about the numbers...pure and simple. Get as much done with as small an expenditure as possible. Usually a mandate with ANY IT shop. Show me a business that wants ANY of its money to be spent without a reason or benefit and I will show you a business that is on its way to not being a business.

I own DSLR camera equipment. Everyone who does is in the habit of spending money when it is not needed. My computer build from 2 years ago has 12 gigs. I'm not really interested in going BACKWARDS with your recommendations of 8 gigs. This is 2013, the minimum now is 16, and the recommended is 32, and I'm going for 64.

When I purchased my D800e, I post-processed the same way I always did; but I could tell a discernible difference in computer handling speed. So even with my 12Gig system with a GTX 580, plenty of HDD space, on a nice mobo, and I still could tell the difference easily.

NO ONE needs to be in IT to realize that D800 files are immense and just adding a few layers then applying a filter would cause the progress bar to come up and stay up way longer than before the D800e.

And when I get my new computer setup, my computer will process files faster again. You have to keep up with technology, not lag behind it. And I like to step ahead of the curve. My current computer is 2 years old, but it's still better than what most people are buying; and I can see a discernible difference in post-processing speed between a 36MP camera and a 16MP camera.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RomanJohnston
Forum ProPosts: 18,394Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to Biological_Viewfinder, 8 months ago

Biological_Viewfinder wrote:

RomanJohnston wrote:

IT for broke people? How about not spending money when it is not needed? Or are you in the habit of spending money when it is not needed. I am about the numbers...pure and simple. Get as much done with as small an expenditure as possible. Usually a mandate with ANY IT shop. Show me a business that wants ANY of its money to be spent without a reason or benefit and I will show you a business that is on its way to not being a business.

I own DSLR camera equipment. Everyone who does is in the habit of spending money when it is not needed. My computer build from 2 years ago has 12 gigs. I'm not really interested in going BACKWARDS with your recommendations of 8 gigs. This is 2013, the minimum now is 16, and the recommended is 32, and I'm going for 64.

Not everyone does. I JUST finally broke down and got a D800....and only because of the extra pixels for my monster prints for my customers. No one said go backwards...I said 8 gigs is the sweet spot and my benchmarking is proof of that. If you have 16 gigs...by all means...keep it. No one is mandating ANYTHING to you....so you need to chill out. If you want to waste your money on 32 gigs....have at it. Currently I dont know of a MoBo or Processer that will handle 64...so good luck with that.

When I purchased my D800e, I post-processed the same way I always did; but I could tell a discernible difference in computer handling speed. So even with my 12Gig system with a GTX 580, plenty of HDD space, on a nice mobo, and I still could tell the difference easily.

NO ONE needs to be in IT to realize that D800 files are immense and just adding a few layers then applying a filter would cause the progress bar to come up and stay up way longer than before the D800e.

I dont ned to be in IT...I just AM and have a ton of experiencing benchmarking for exactly this kind of work....your really defensive....do you do this social interaction thingy much?

And when I get my new computer setup, my computer will process files faster again. You have to keep up with technology, not lag behind it. And I like to step ahead of the curve. My current computer is 2 years old, but it's still better than what most people are buying; and I can see a discernible difference in post-processing speed between a 36MP camera and a 16MP camera.

Cool....enjoy.

I just know for most consumers processing D800 files....an i3 chip. 8-16 gb of ram and a reasonable video card....( I like the Quadro cards that are designed and have custom drivers designed to interact with Adobe Products) My Quadro 600 does very well for regular editing.

Now that I am starting to play with video ...that might change though...but again...we are talking about editing photos here.

Oh...and some of you here (not just you) should lay off the coffee. Your all wrapped a little tighter than normal...were just having a conversation folks.

Yall are acting like I just took your favorite toy away from you.

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
moogle73
Forum MemberPosts: 63Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to Biological_Viewfinder, 8 months ago

yeah, I have a feeling there are ALOT of people both in the IT and Photography fields, they seems to blend well and have a lot of cross overs for those types of people, me being 1 of them. And yes I am directly responsible for testing, benchmarking, building, etc IT needs as my primary source of income.

with that being said 8gb is far to low for a "premium photo editing rig", especially in todays standards. 3 years ago, 8gb would have been great, now thats bare minimum IMO, I would rather see someone go with 16 or 32gb. and yes it does get used, multiple times personally I have had my photoshop use up 20-32gb of my ram (I have 32 in my rig currently), Large raw file's multiple layers, panos, stitching etc eats up ram faster than the cookie monster with cookies. And i'm talking strictly trying to edit large raw files from cameras like d800 or similar and other photo needs, not your every day "I need to run microsoft word or excel computer" lol, those types of users would only need a Maximum of 8gb for low key applications like that, but once you get into heavy photo, video, or autocad type applications, ram goes quick... real quick.

On top of which ram is DIRT CHEAP now, you can get 32gb of good ram for what $250 now, vs the $60 for 8gb of ram. IMO the extra $175-200 is a small price to pay to be set on ram for the foreseeable future, as well as guarantee you wont be held back by lack of ram on large multi layered and or pano shots. As it is building this type of rig is going to run you prob $1500-2000, so the extra 10% cost to ensure proper ram is worth it. Compare it to lenses since were in a photography forum, if you were deciding between 2 lenses, but one was significantly better, and had more growth potential for the future, but only cost 10% or $175-200 more most people would go for the better lens. Why because its better for them in the long run, why is a PC any different, why skimp on something that is going to be used on ALL PHOTOS you ever take, it will directly effect your editing and time. It would be a different story if we were talking about a $1000 difference or something but were not, were talking roughly 8-10% of the overall build.  and if you went with 16gb instead, thats only about $100 or so, so your talking only a couple % more in cost vs going with 8gb.

 moogle73's gear list:moogle73's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Hasa
Regular MemberPosts: 303
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to Biological_Viewfinder, 8 months ago

Hi, I agree that there is no reason to go back on specifications. My PC is a few years old with a 6-core AMD Phenom X6 1090T, 8GB RAM (very rarely used up), a decent power supply and cabinet that is fully equipped with a fast OS drive C:, an auxilialry (swap) hybrid drive D and net 4TB samsung ecodrive (silent & cool) built from 4 drives attached to the onboard raid controller to get me RAID 0+1 (striping for twice the speed + mirroring for full backup). It costs little more than buying external drives and there is never a worry about remembering to do backups.

My main concern is that the CPU gets rather hot.

Multi-core? All 6 cores are used by Lightroom 4 even when just zooming in and out of an image. I bought the six-core cpu specifically for stitching panoramas with PTgui. I knew I had to do 'something' when I upgraded from a 10Mpix camera to a 36Mpix camera.

When doing large panoramas I do run out of physical memory.And yes, the point made by another contributor about a RAM disk sounds like a great idea!

-- hide signature --

Smile and the world smiles back!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RomanJohnston
Forum ProPosts: 18,394Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to moogle73, 8 months ago

First...thanks for the decent response. No snarky comments...etc.

Now on to the original content of the OP...

OP said Dell laptop...SSD drive, 16 gb of ram and i7 chip on a laptop. Yes...faster can be had, but it sounds like the machine he has is rather capable. (this is what led me to the reload of the OS. Two years of using your computer can really clog things up....being in IT you know exactly what I mean.)

My findings....8-16GB of ram is quite good. Yes. you can get more and it IS cheap. No biggy....have no problems with such a recommendation. He already has 16gb as stated in his OP...and I would bet you a nickle to a doughnut that his ram is maxed out for his current laptop mo-bo.

He has an SSD drive (I currently am running two of them..one for the OS and one for my Photoshop Cache) and they are wikid fast...leads me to again...saying his original hardware is up to the task.

Video cards - Unless your editing video or 3D....most current cards over $200.00 are not going to give you a good return on your money. Find the most cuda cores for the money and have at it. My cheapie Quadro 600 card will even do 3D cad fairly well....and its only $150.00 (probably cheaper now).(I am guessing he doesn't have much of an option for this on his laptop)

i7 is not necessary unless your crunching hard numbers like 3D cad or video ...both witch the OP did not mention. I have found little value between the i3 and the i5 in my benchmarking...with the real leap found to the i7 when needed. So for 2D work that doesn't tax the processor...I find the i3 actually faster than most would believe.

To all those out there who are having fits over my recommendations....make your own recommendations.

I benchmark Civil Cad 3D, Bentley Microstation, ArcGIS 2 and 3D as well as Photoshop on a regular basis. I am not just benchmarking for Office users like some here have suggested.

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Doublehelix
Contributing MemberPosts: 603Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to RomanJohnston, 8 months ago

I also want to back up what Roman said, and to say that over a year ago, he gave me similar advice on how to upgrade my aging Pentium quad core system... upgrade the RAM and add a GPU-based video card to get some extra life out of the machine. Great advice!!! I did just that, and got an extra 1.5-2.0 years of extra life for a very small financial outlay.

That being said...

I am not going to finally upgrade that old monster and will probably go for broke and go ultimate. (3930K with 32 GB of RAM, etc.). I am sure in 3-4 years from now, Roman will probably give me some more great advice about how to extend the life of that machine.

THANKS ROMAN!!!

-- hide signature --

James

 Doublehelix's gear list:Doublehelix's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Scott McMorrow
Regular MemberPosts: 340
Like?
Re: Basics.... Lightroom Optimization
In reply to RomanJohnston, 8 months ago

Adobe has a nice page on optimization of Lightroom for performance.  Since I'm running a 27" monitor with 2560 resolution I found that by increasing the preview cache size to 2880 made a huge difference in viewing and editing.

http://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/optimize-performance-lightroom.html#main_Graphics_cards

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
The Andy G
Senior MemberPosts: 1,048Gear list
Like?
Re: I'm using a Mac pro from 2006 and it inhales D800e files with no problem
In reply to PhotoKaz, 8 months ago

PhotoKaz wrote:

The Andy G wrote:

Hi:

This is a non-issue.

Mac Pro or Macbook Pro? Both came with 1GB of memory as standard in 2006 so unless yours was a custom build I'm having a hard time with your "no problem" statement.

-- hide signature --

May 26, 2013 19:42:56

I’m using Lightroom 5 on a Mac Pro 1,1 from 2006 and really have no issues processing D800e files apart from it gobbling hard drive space.

My current configuration is a 5 GB of ram, with a SSD for the boot drive. I have also upgraded the video card a few years ago but Lightroom isn’t particularly dependent upon video cards so it’s not really the issue.

The reasons why I suspect most people have trouble with Lightroom are because they don’t understand what happens in develop mode, their catalogues are too big and they’ve moved file locations.

The only real issue that bugs me is the building of previews. I’ll address that below.

Here are three links you may find helpful:

First off, SSDs will help LR in many ways but not much in develop mode. Even less of you've moved the cache to another non-SSD volume. Why? Once the action has been moved into processor and RAM, the volume is out of the process, cache aside.

http://www.computer-darkroom.com/blog/will-an-ssd-improve-adobe-lightroom-performance/

This is why snappy video cards also don’t appear to make much of an impact on your LR performance. In develop mode, it’s all about CPU and RAM.

Secondly, building those 1:1 previews may need planning. Not much for it except to do as Adobe advises.

  • Set your cache to the job size or larger.
  • Keep the catalog and preview cache in the same folder. No, really, don’t move this and do not move it to a slower drive.
  • Build those 1:1 previews on demand. Meaning, if you're rarely using LR, and only working with it on spot jobs, Library/Previews - Standard previews or 1:1 can be chosen on demand as you need. However, you can in preferences choose what your standard previews are. By default, photos being worked on automatically force 1:1 builds so you may have hit a ceiling with your processor/HD combination. Meaning, if the item is in a pokey “Green” drives somewhere, move it onto a 7200 RPM, 10,000 RPM or SSD.

Building the 1:1s is really the only slowness I've noticed on my system but I tend to batch process an import, work on it for two weeks and then move off to the next project.

Thirdly, work order is important.

Adobe's recommended work order is:

  • Spot healing.
  • Geometry corrections, such as Lens Correction profiles and Manual corrections, including keystone corrections using the Vertical slider.
  • Global non-detail corrections, such as Exposure and White Balance. These corrections can also be done first if desired.
  • Local corrections, such as Gradient Filter and Adjustment Brush strokes.
  • Detail corrections, such as Noise Reduction and Sharpening.
  • Use native rather than irregular zooms (1:1/1:2/1:3/1:4 et cetera)
  • Consider going back to the 2010 colour profile for less resource-intensive image processing.

My own work order is to add the lens geometry upon import since I tend to shoot wide and corner brightness is more variable in those lenses I rarely use spot healing apart from jacket lint and acne.

Fourthly, maintenance matters.

Adobe advises keeping catalogues to under 10,000 images. This is not only good practice as it keeps your DB from having a single point of failure but maintenance is also easier. Optimization and back up of the catalogue can be a dog once the number of images gets big.

Random slowdowns I was experiencing and sudden spikes in processor demand went away once I did as Adobe advised and work with smaller catalogues.

One more thing to consider:

If you are shooting 14-bit, and compressed, these will invariably slowdown LR when building previews. I do not know the answer, but probably the decompression may be slowing down the preview builds; added the 25 per cent increase in colour space and there's your slowdown.

I always shoot 14-bit compressed so I don't even think of how much it slows operations down any more. It may be that the decompression is not infinitely thred-able. There are probably bubbles in the pipeline but what they are, I don't know.

Take home points:

  • SSDs only partially boost Lightroom 3/4/5 performance. Activities that are processor and RAM dependent like developing are not likely to see an improvement.
  • Work order matters.
  • Configuration and maintenance also matter

As always, be careful with advice from crazies you meet on the internet!

-- hide signature --

__________________________________________
What do all the buttons and dials do?

 The Andy G's gear list:The Andy G's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.4G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
moogle73
Forum MemberPosts: 63Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to RomanJohnston, 8 months ago

I agree with a lot of what was said below,

RomanJohnston wrote:

First...thanks for the decent response. No snarky comments...etc.

always keep it civil, forums are tough in general as no emotion is conveyed and things get taken the wrong way some times

Now on to the original content of the OP...

OP said Dell laptop...SSD drive, 16 gb of ram and i7 chip on a laptop. Yes...faster can be had, but it sounds like the machine he has is rather capable. (this is what led me to the reload of the OS. Two years of using your computer can really clog things up....being in IT you know exactly what I mean.)

I agree, what he has "should" be more than enough, and if he really is suffering from performance issues then he probably has something else going on software wise. I was simply recommending what would be the best desktop type of computer to to build if he was in the market for on which is what it sounded like by his post.

My findings....8-16GB of ram is quite good. Yes. you can get more and it IS cheap. No biggy....have no problems with such a recommendation. He already has 16gb as stated in his OP...and I would bet you a nickle to a doughnut that his ram is maxed out for his current laptop mo-bo.

yeah I always recommend more ram than not, its too cheap now not to. I would always want to error on the side of too much than not enough, even someone does put more than they really need right now in their rig, they will most certainly grow into it, with each passing year more and more ram intensive programs and utilities are running. lol ah I remember the "good old days" when 16mb or 32mb or ram was considered blazing fast, now were discussing GB's lol.  Also I agree he prob maxed out his laptop ram quota on his motherboard, also his laptop ram probably runs at a slower speed than a desktop equivalent but never the less it should be enough for what hes doing unless he literally has like a 50 layer pano or something lol

He has an SSD drive (I currently am running two of them..one for the OS and one for my Photoshop Cache) and they are wikid fast...leads me to again...saying his original hardware is up to the task.

that they are, night and day over traditional magnetic platter disks. If anyone is looking to give their pc's a kick in the pants, upgrading from disks to ssd's will significantly increase general performance. (as will adding a decent video card if you are running a computer without one)

Video cards - Unless your editing video or 3D....most current cards over $200.00 are not going to give you a good return on your money. Find the most cuda cores for the money and have at it. My cheapie Quadro 600 card will even do 3D cad fairly well....and its only $150.00 (probably cheaper now).(I am guessing he doesn't have much of an option for this on his laptop)

I concur, a solid 2gb ddr5 graphics card is more than sufficient (they can be hand around and below that $200 price point, the one I am running I think is only about $140-150) you don't really need more unless you are a heavy gamer and want to run at max resolution and graphics, or and or heavy video editor, and or heavy autocad / 3d graphical designer.

i7 is not necessary unless your crunching hard numbers like 3D cad or video ...both witch the OP did not mention. I have found little value between the i3 and the i5 in my benchmarking...with the real leap found to the i7 when needed. So for 2D work that doesn't tax the processor...I find the i3 actually faster than most would believe.

I love my i7, yes 80% of the time you wont benefit from the extra raw computing power, but sometimes you will. You just have to decide if that extra cpu power is worth $400-700 to you (difference in price between i3-i7's) Major thing going for i7's though besides the extra cores over i3's, is also the ton of extra L2 and L3 cache. If you can afford the i7, I would recommend it in a heart beat, if you need to save a few bones, the lower processors will always suffice.

 moogle73's gear list:moogle73's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RomanJohnston
Forum ProPosts: 18,394Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics.... Lightroom Optimization
In reply to Scott McMorrow, 8 months ago

Scott McMorrow wrote:

Adobe has a nice page on optimization of Lightroom for performance. Since I'm running a 27" monitor with 2560 resolution I found that by increasing the preview cache size to 2880 made a huge difference in viewing and editing.

http://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/optimize-performance-lightroom.html#main_Graphics_cards

Cool tip...thanks!!!

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads