Messages

46

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4... DOH!!!

« on: February 04, 2013, 10:59:59 AM »

Keep your current WinXP PC the way it is and get another PC for your photography with Win7 Pro x64 and run Lightroom 4 on that.  Get a good higher end IPS display for the photo pc.  The Photo PC is just another tool.

Excellent idea.  I've been tolerating Win 7 just to run LR 4.  There has not been one positive thing I've gained with Win 7 but instead lots of things that annoy me.  I'm seriously considering building a dedicated Win 7 photo PC while my main PC is XP.

Full Disclosure - I am in IT, I see and support many types of systems and OS versions.  I used XP x64 as my main workstation up until a couple months ago.  I still use it for some things (through an RDP session from my new Win7x64 workstation).  I sympathize with folks that don't want to change.  For those that the PC is just a tool, upgrading/changing the OS is a hassle.  Still, please be aware that the time is nearing when all updates, support, etc are going to end for XP.

XP will become a dead OS in April 2014.  http://www.technibble.com/windows-xp-support-ends-in-april-2014-what-technicians-need-to-know/

What this means is you will no longer receive updates for security, drivers, etc.  The OS will still function but it will cease to exist as far as Microsoft is concerned.

Windows 7 is actually a great OS and it isn't that hard to become comfortable with.  It performs better and much more reliable and secure.  You would like it even more on a laptop.  Lightroom or any other similar software is going to benefit from a 64 bit OS and at least 8GB of RAM, preferably 16GB.  Just do it and don't look back.  It's not that big of a deal.  Then after you are comfortable with Win7 on the Photo PC, start deciding about your main workstation.  My suggestion on that is to go to buy.com or eCost.com and purchase a refurbished HP or DELL Core2Duo workstation PC with Win7 Pro for about $250.  I would suggest to stick with Intel Core2 or i Series CPU + Chipset and away from AMD or Pentium 4.  Here's a good example... http://tinyurl.com/aza9qt5

47

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: February 04, 2013, 10:36:26 AM »

Brand B - dolina is joking.  I think if you read through the thread, you'll find several ideas but everyone is trying to avoid the mac vs PC debate as much as is possible without denying the price factor.  I didn't get the impression the theme of the thread was that one size fits all.  The theme does have a lot of opinions that agree about the iMac not being the best choice for video work or any purpose that requires long term performance and reliability.  The iMac simply can't be repaired or upgraded easily and is still expensive to get configured to the highest spec available.  The other undeniable fact is that regardless of which Apple solution is chosen, they are all very expensive for that experience.  So to save money, buying a refurbished system may be a good compromise and still achieve good satisfaction and value.

48

Software & Accessories / Re: Rain Covers

« on: February 04, 2013, 12:34:38 AM »

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005LKE7PI/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_4?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A12IPMVN62L4AI

I dont' have it yet, but I was thinking about getting this.

This looks interesting.  I keep the Op/Tech handy in case I ever need it.  If you plan to do a lot of rain shooting, perhaps the Amazon device will be a solution but whatever is purchased, it still must be packed and carried.  I suggest a more permanent solution for heavier use but have the op/tech handy for times when the rain is unexpected since it's inexpensive and easy to pack.  Having a decent lightweight hiking umbrella may also be a good solution.

49

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4... DOH!!!

« on: February 04, 2013, 12:25:07 AM »

Keep your current WinXP PC the way it is and get another PC for your photography with Win7 Pro x64 and run Lightroom 4 on that.  Get a good higher end IPS display for the photo pc.  The Photo PC is just another tool.

50

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: February 01, 2013, 08:35:15 PM »

Great RMC33!  Sounds like a wise choice.  However on the SSD, if not a huge rush on the 512, get a 256 until the prices drop more.  It's easy to upgrade later with SuperDuper.  Just my 2c.  If you want great performance and solid reliability, get an Intel 520 series 240GB unit for about $250.  Lightning fast and Intel quality.  Or the 480 GB version isn't that much more (per GB) I guess at $510 for 480GB.  Either way you will love the Intel SSDs and they come with wonderful install kits too.  Don't forget to get a large 2TB drive and a redundant external 2TB drive for internal redundant storage and internal/external backups.

http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Series-Solid-State-Drive-2-5-Inch/dp/B006VCP9G6

HAVE FUN!! 

I have an extra 512 Crucial. It was for my old laptop but I got the MBP Retina so it has been sitting. The internals will be 2x 2TB caviar blacks in RAID1 with 6tb of NAS (In raid 1). I will also be bumping to 16gb of ram.

I learned a long time ago to back up back up back up. ALl my photo shoots are on 8 or 16gb cards and I dump to a custom built card reader/HDD/Screen while shooting. I lost almost an entire Ducks game to 1 64GB card dying.

Either way.. Thank you and Night for your advice. I placed the order with apple (and even got the GF to get a 2nd monitor!) about an hour ago. I am kind of curious if apple has kept their internals super clean like back in the G5 series days.

Sounds sweet!!  Can't wait to hear about all the great work and satisfaction you are getting from the new setup.  Coooool!   

51

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: February 01, 2013, 05:51:15 PM »

Great RMC33!  Sounds like a wise choice.  However on the SSD, if not a huge rush on the 512, get a 256 until the prices drop more.  It's easy to upgrade later with SuperDuper.  Just my 2c.  If you want great performance and solid reliability, get an Intel 520 series 240GB unit for about $250.  Lightning fast and Intel quality.  Or the 480 GB version isn't that much more (per GB) I guess at $510 for 480GB.  Either way you will love the Intel SSDs and they come with wonderful install kits too.  Don't forget to get a large 2TB drive and a redundant external 2TB drive for internal redundant storage and internal/external backups.

http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Series-Solid-State-Drive-2-5-Inch/dp/B006VCP9G6

HAVE FUN!! 

52

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: February 01, 2013, 12:28:08 PM »

I am a Mac fan, have only ever owned Macs blah blah. I cannot understand anybody buying any kind of computer where the hard drive is not comparatively easily replaced, for goodness sake in this day and age they are practically consumables. iMacs have become toys for the masses, and there is nothing intrinsically wrong with that, just don't even think about getting one for actual computing work. As I said earlier in the thread, the Mac Mini is far better than the iMac, I put a second drive in mine so I now have a 256GB SSD and a 1TB 7200 internal, I also maxed the RAM and it is a great little tool, works well for photos but I wouldn't like to edit too much video on it. The 2012 iMac is tomorrows doorstop.

P.S. My sister has had five iMacs, her current one the HD died on 13 months, she has been booting from an external USB drive for months, postage to get it to a somebody who can split it open is around $100, each way, and that is an iMac that can be worked on, plus the cost of the drive and the semi skilled fitting and even that is a crazy hassle to get a new HDD.

TOTALLY AGREE!  My sentiments exactly.  Very expensive and very risky.  As I look at the Apple store, I guess the Mac Mini is a better value now than it used to be.  (It used to be so weak, limited and expensive that any mac laptop was a better deal.)  So yeah, I guess I could support a Mac Mini purchase now.  Esp if you get a nice IPS display.  You can get my DELL U2410 for around $300 now.  It's great.  Or any nice display including Apple (Glossy = GLARE!) depending on how much $$ you want to spend.

53

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: February 01, 2013, 11:58:34 AM »

I would recommend to daniemare to go for the 27" with the i5 and fusion drive, then max out the RAM to 36 GB aftermarket. This should service your needs very well for 3 or 4 years. I am about to receive my new iMac Tuesday [about 4 weeks from my order] as a replacement for my Mac Pro 2,1. I really wanted a new Pro, but got tired of waiting for Apple to crank out an actual, modern, state-of-art replacement. I use Lightroom and Photoshop, which is not really too demanding, but specced out my iMac all the way [except for RAM] anyway, so that I'll be comfortable keeping it for 5+ years.

If you get the iMac 27" i5, you can upgrade the ram from Crucial for a couple hundred dollars.  http://tinyurl.com/a8gz37d
That's about all you can do after it is purchased.  Then pray nothing ever goes wrong with it since it can't be opened easily.  And after you upgrade it all the way at purchase time, you could be well on your way to a retina macbook pro.  (Still more expensive but much better unit and more versatile.)

54

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: February 01, 2013, 11:30:34 AM »

You could always build a hackintosh...

http://nofilmschool.com/build-a-hackintosh/

I looked over the Hackintosh Tutorial.  It looks well done.  Still requires someone with PC experience but it is one of  the better guides for this.  I would suggest shopping around for the components.  Use Amazon but also NewEgg, MicroCenter, buy.com, etc.  (MicroCenter is notorious for having Intel CPUs for dirt cheap prices for some reason.)  I would also try to use a nice Intel 510 series SSD for better performance and reliability.  The liquid CPU cooler is overkill unless you plan to overclock and if you do, you should just save a little money and go with the i5-3570K.  (Here is a good discussion about i7 vs i5 performance with regard to gaming or photo/video work.  http://apcmag.com/ivy-bridge-cpu-buyers-guide.htm )  Overall, this *might* inspire me to build one sometime.  Most of what stops me is all the work that this guy already performed so I may give it shot sometime soon.

55

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: February 01, 2013, 09:13:09 AM »

At the moment I am picturing niterider, dolina and myself in the corner of the (CR) party having a nice little debate.   

In general we are all right with good points, we all understand and we all need to raise our glasses and salute the fact that we live in a world where we have all these choices and in addition, we are all badass photographers and like to turn wrenches too!  Gee, what a great life!

56

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: February 01, 2013, 12:56:52 AM »

Again, I agree with niterider, a mac tower would be best.  So would a Wintel box custom made.  I'm not a big fan of the HackinTosh FrankenMac only because Apple makes it hard to support so there can be weird quirks or issues after an update sometimes.  Fine for fun and hobby stuff but I wouldn't use it for business.

Regardless of what you decide, I still think the iMac should be the last choice, but that's just me.

Keep us posted on how it goes!

57

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: February 01, 2013, 12:51:27 AM »

No Problem Niterider!  And, yes I agree, SSD drives are a great upgrade.  I use them all the time and totally endorse folks getting all the time and ROI they can from their hardware, esp hardware as expensive as Apple.  The only thing to watch is that there isn't any compatibility problems with the mac in question and the drive.  It's not as common as it used to be but still a possibility.  Other World Computing is a great option because they are easy to work with, decent prices and support.  Get a copy of SuperDuper and that will make it even easier to migrate the drives.  And the mac in question must already be using a SATA hard drive which is pretty likely if it's less than 5 years old.

Keep in mind that the older the system, the slower the CPU, the older the chipset and graphics and the possibility that the battery is either dead or close to EOL.  An SSD improves a lot because so much performance is disk dependent but rendering and other CPU intensive tasks will still only run at the supported CPU speeds, etc.

RMC33, your question is likely answered in all the info that is already in this thread.  In general, my thoughts on macs is that iMacs aren't great for doing real work and all macs are too expensive.  A higher end MacBook Pro or Mac Pro are more ideal but they aren't cheap.  iMacs are less expensive but they are also less mac.  I just don't think iMacs are the best use of funds for more than casual use.

What concerns me is that you are doing the photo work but she is doing video.  The video is what will suffer come rendering time due to the older CPU.  If she doesn't mind waiting, so be it.

As an IT consultant, I have only had limited success convincing a would be iMac buyer to choose something else.  The Apple marketing and allure is strong and often people just want it no matter what.  But 3-6 months later I sometimes notice that they no longer use it much or that they complain that it's too slow or limited for their intended purpose.  Unfortunately, not much can be done because it can't be upgraded or modified enough.

If I ever get another mac, it will likely be a macbook pro due to its versatility and ease of resale.  In fact, if it's another year or more, I might get lucky and buy my IT buddies' tricked out unit for half of what he paid.  And it will still be too expensive!  (But at least it will have retina.)

Hope this helps at least a little bit.

58

Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac

« on: January 31, 2013, 08:07:52 PM »

Sure videos a full different ball game though. You look at intel with their quicksync dedicated on the CPU itself. It's much simpler and more standardized than RAW formats that are company specific. GPU only helps if the software can be coded to use it which as I said most RAW programs don't seem to be doing due to the complexity. I think another part is the quality also can suffer using these things so they're good for previewing but don't help with the final rendering or if they do, it's of lower quality than when rendered with the CPU.

Yes, this is correct.  GPU doesn't matter for images unless there is code written that talks to it, takes advantage of it, etc.  Otherwise it just passes the graphics information through at a fixed rate as it receives if from the OS.  Video isn't much different, it's just redrawing images faster but video isn't 3D rendering.  Games are written to exploit the graphics card, engine, etc.  That's why some graphics cards work better for some games.  Even Windows now exploits the GPU a bit to help render the Aero interface.  Adobe has begun to try to write some of their code to exploit the GPU on some cards but that's also pretty minimal at this point.  I have a nice middle of the road nVidia GeForce 8400 GS Graphics card.  Not top of the line but no piece of junk either.  Around $200 back when I bought it a couple years ago.  Win7 Pro Enterprise x64, i7 CPU, 32GB RAM.  SSD for the OS.  The preview pictures in Lightroom 4 still drag a bit.  Nothing I can do, Adobe did something with LR4 to cause some latency.  (It was faster in LR3.)  Exporting, photo tools, etc all do pretty well considering there is a lot of CPU being used then.

Bottom Line, if money isn't an issue, get the best video you can but if money is tight, don't bother.  Either way, it won't change the performance much if at all for photos.

BTW, I met an IT associate of mine today and eventually, the subject of his MacBook Pro came up.  We discussed briefly how much it helped him with some photo and web development things he works on all day but it did cost him $3200 + over another grand for the large display he uses with it.  And then there's the software, Parallels and Windows 8 he runs on it.  I mentioned this thread and we quickly agreed that the iMacs are essentially a waste of money for doing any serious work like photography, video, graphics design, web dev, etc.  Lower end CPUs, graphics, lower memory limits and slow 5400 RPM drives which he reminded me about.  Even the display isn't as good as what you could get other ways.  In essence, not worth the money compared to other (more expensive but capable) Apple mac alternatives.  Sorry folks but you're just not going to get a standout mac photo workstation for under $2000.  Adequate maybe but not exceptional.  Not new anyway.

59

PowerShot / Re: A camera for backpacking into the wilderness...

« on: January 31, 2013, 09:16:28 AM »

OK, Wow.  I looked at the Katadyn Water MicroFilter Link and OMG!  Almost $400 list price and $275 on Amazon!  Then I read a few of the lengthy and glowing 117 x 5 Star reviews.  What a great filter!  It's like the L Lens of Water Filters.  One thing I couldn't figure out - is the pump single or dual stage?  (Pumps on single or dual strokes.)

rusty...I have one in my "emergency" kit that I keep in the basement...just in case.  but so far, it's just got me lots of "eye rolls" from my wife because she knows how much it cost.

Sounds like you are prepared!  If there's an emergency here, I'll go to the storm room and crawl into my big safe with a few (pre-filtered) beers & Cheetos + an iPod and hope I never have to poop or pee ever again.  Oh and maybe a camera to record the apocalypse afterward (until the battery dies) assuming there will be any way to ever access or use the digital images.

60

Canon General / Re: Curious Distraction: Explain your username, avatar picture, etc...

« on: January 31, 2013, 09:11:38 AM »

In the earlier 1980's, I built a 9600 BAUD from scratch using perf-board, discrete ICs, resistors, small speaker and moving coil microphone etc., to transmit research data from Ohio to Oregon in a motel room.
Took more than an hour to transmit.
The phone bill  .
-r

Didn't have your 4G LTE HotSpot and i7 Laptop with you that day, eh?  Had to make due with that 9600 Baud HackinModem and KayPro or Compaq mobile PC XT or AT huh?  (And you were stylin' if you had that!)