August 27, 2014, 01:10:08 PM

Author Topic: Not Windows  (Read 7533 times)

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4407
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #30 on: July 30, 2013, 07:33:09 PM »
Hrm, good question! My CR2 are in one folder, I do an import manually dropping them there, then use "synchronize".

Imho not a smart idea, Windows filesystems hate folders with a lot of files (only the newest Linux/unix fs are better here). How many files are in there? Simply do an experiment: Copy some cr2 into another folder, create a new catalog, add them nr/sharpness to zero - better that way?

What I can't wrap my head around is why it doesn't render the images very fast/ahead of time.  I tried the following:
1) Just letting it sit there for an hour, so it pre-renders, say, 100 photos

100 cr2 in an hour? That's pretty crappy, even by my standards (dual core 2ghz laptop). With 20mb/cr2 this cannot be a disk bottleneck, but rather sounds maxed out cpu or memory. Look at taskmanager, enable the relevant columns (cpu usage, cpu time, peak working set, max commit size) and find out.

Kelt0901

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #31 on: July 30, 2013, 08:00:46 PM »

 I could not live any more without building my own machine to the specs I need, so there is no weak link in my desktop.


I agree, it's easier to build a PC exactly to your needs and, is easy and cost effective to upgrade as technology changes.  Apple technology usually lags behind the PC and is very inflexible with upgrades.
5D ii, EOS M, 24-70 2.8 L, 24-105 L, 70-200 L, 100-400 L, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 40 2.8; Mamiya 645 DM, ZD Back, 55-110, 105-210; RB67 Pro SD, many KL series lenses; Horseman LDC; Horseman LDX 5" X 4"; Horseman VCC.

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4407
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #32 on: July 30, 2013, 08:07:52 PM »
I could not live any more without building my own machine to the specs I need, so there is no weak link in my desktop.
I agree, it's easier to build a PC exactly to your needs and, is easy and cost effective to upgrade as technology changes.

-1 ... because today's pcs are built out of fewer components (many things are on the cpu die for example), there is very little to customize in a standard setup that *really* makes a difference - which is why so many oem are going out of business, they've simply lost their selling points.

On the other hands buying a complete pc ensures you support (fewer points to argue over who has done what wrong) and people who do this for a living imho simply are better at building a clean machine with proper cabling than me doing it every so many years. Plus many oems get very competitive bulk prices for their components which I find very hard to match even when buying at the cheapest discount/online shops I know.

It might make a difference for hardcore gaming and ultra-high end setups, but for your general lightroom/ps editing personally I'm leaning towards buying a complete desktop once I feel the need for more speed than my current crappy laptop can deliver.

Random Orbits

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1308
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #33 on: July 30, 2013, 08:58:56 PM »
-1 ... because today's pcs are built out of fewer components (many things are on the cpu die for example), there is very little to customize in a standard setup that *really* makes a difference - which is why so many oem are going out of business, they've simply lost their selling points.

On the other hands buying a complete pc ensures you support (fewer points to argue over who has done what wrong) and people who do this for a living imho simply are better at building a clean machine with proper cabling than me doing it every so many years. Plus many oems get very competitive bulk prices for their components which I find very hard to match even when buying at the cheapest discount/online shops I know.

It might make a difference for hardcore gaming and ultra-high end setups, but for your general lightroom/ps editing personally I'm leaning towards buying a complete desktop once I feel the need for more speed than my current crappy laptop can deliver.

-1.  Just because the chipset includes more features, it doesn't mean that they perform well.  The cheap complete PCs have older/slower technologies, sometimes several generations older.  RAM in groups and speeds that make them harder to upgrade to significantly larger values, power supplies that can barely support additional hardware (i.e. discrete video), etc.  If you want a barebones computer (around 500), then a complete PC might be worth it, although you can still get chassis + MB + cpu as a package and add on for a competitive price).

The key to building your own is to get quality parts the first time.  Reuse your monitor, keyboard, mouse, case, optical drive, HDDs and power supply.  Upgrade the video card, motherboard, add a HDD or a SDD or whatever you want.  The computer companies may be able to buy parts for less money but then you're paying for their labor, their overhead and their profit.

Rofflesaurrr

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #34 on: July 30, 2013, 09:34:01 PM »
What neruo brought up gave me an idea; I think I'm going to pick up one of these as a 'cheap' fix/test:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00657GLH8/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_5?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A1OQ5B5VHVHCUX

My iMac doesn't have USB 3, but it DOES have Firewire . . . so that should eliminate any question as to if it's actual processing power I need or if it's a bus/disk access issue.

-------

I'm actually surprised about the linux guys with Mac hate.  I understand it's benefits, and I only use Mac OS as a crutch because Xwindows isn't completely familiar to me and frustrates me. 

Still, it's a great step forwards from Windows and what Windows has become.

Firewire 800 is faster than USB 2.0, but not THAT fast. You'll see a realistic read/write speed of about 60-70MB/sec over Firewire 800. Most current generation SSDs will exceed 500MB/sec read speeds. You will notice a little improvement due to the SSD having near instantaneous access times though. I wouldn't waste money on a SSD if FW800 is the only connection option. I guess you don't have Thunderbolt?

symmar22

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #35 on: July 31, 2013, 05:05:14 AM »
Have they seen the new 'coffee can'?   8)

Sorry Neuro, I did not want to enter the Mac vs PC dogfight, Apple makes good machines for sure, but for me they are too much of a closed system (hardware speaking). I guess I see it too much from the maintenance point of view, since I am used to built and repair myself my computers (I love Lenovo laptops for the very same reason). The laptops are excellent, but the desktop offer is IMO too limited, not much between the 3000$ workstation and the 27 inches "vertical laptop". Lots of Mac users I know would be happy with smaller, cheaper, "non-workstation" version of the MacPro.

Yes I saw the "coffee can", it seems like a very nice tool, my only worry is about the graphic power; I mean it's too much of it. So I hope for Mac users that they will propose a cheaper alternative. Two powerful FireGL is overkill for 99% of the people (unless you edit pro 4K video), and is a lot of wasted money and energy for most of us; it's likely the graphic cards will be for some 1500 to 2000$ part of the equation, so I sincerely hope they will release a model with the poor man's graphic card.

Sith Zombie

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
    • Lightroom Images
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #36 on: July 31, 2013, 06:13:38 AM »
an SSD might give your existing Macs a boost (unless you're already using them).

+1,000
 
 
While I'm not a programmer, what I can say is the best decision I made computer wise was dumping apple around 2006 for my wintel machine. Win7pro is polished, fast, and just works.

I used to think that switching from Win to Apple was almost a one-way road, but you are not alone.
http://photofocus.com/2013/06/10/about-my-switch-from-mac-to-windows/
 
 
 
My 2007 iMac with Snow Leopard opens the EOS M RAW files only with Canon DPP (Preview and iPhoto are obsolete).  :(  And it's slower than when I'm opening the 12.8 Mpx RAWs from my 5Dc (12bit raw, BTW).
I always thought that my computer should last 7 years, so I'll try to resist.
Options I'm considering: adopting Mountain Lion (and iPhoto 11 and/or Elements) and replacing the HD with a SSD (but CPU and GPU would not change)...

I had Leopard for around 6 years and didn't want to upgrade. It was fine for my existing gear but then I got a new camera and aperture wouldn't recognise the RAW files so I updated to Snow Leopard so that aperture could update [Leopard support pretty much dropped]. After that I decided just to go the whole boss hog and update to Mountain Lion and I'm glad I did. Some of the new features are great and any stuff I don't like, like launch pad, I just don't use. You can also customise stuff to bring back the things you miss from Leopard too, for example I got rid of the springy scrolling on folder boxes and changed expose to how it behaved in Leopard. I'd suggest upgrading Ram to 8gig if you haven't already and with a new SSD then you should be fine.

dstppy

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 892
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #37 on: July 31, 2013, 09:32:24 AM »
OP is making their life more difficult, and this tread can quickly devolve into a win/mac/*nix fight.

It *has* descended there already, but windows wasn't invited to the party (but showed up anyhow - sort of how they try and sell you an automatic transmission when you tell them you don't want one)  ;D

Please state what you currently have, as laptop and desktop solutions are different.  Chances are an internal SSD upgrade and maybe a RAM upgrade will tide you over.  State where you have your LR library.  FW 800 is much faster than USB2, but more importantly FW is at a lower CPU overhead on a Mac.  If you're working against an external USB2 drive, make sure there isn't a hub between the drive and your computer.

You're right; I should have explained exactly what I had an how it was set up (and explained where the slowness was, which I did later on). 

Primary work is done on a pre-"i5/i7" iMac (back when intel was calling the stuff 'core'), keep forgetting to look at the specs when I'm at home.  Catalog and Raw Cache file are on primary drive (most likely a 5400rpm), but the raw files are on a USB HDD, which I've pretty much decided is the real issue. I tried bumping the cache size to 10GB as adobe suggested, with some speed improvements.

Fusion drives like in the new iMac's are nice, and you can do it with any Mac running 10.8 and that has 2 drives, a SSD and a SATA drive.

I currently have en route a FireWire/SSD that I'm going to move my current set of RAW files to, and the Cache File, and Catalog.  If THAT gives me an acceptable improvement, then I'll probably just get a newer machine with faster drives and USB 3.0 some time in the future.

Firewire 800 is faster than USB 2.0, but not THAT fast. You'll see a realistic read/write speed of about 60-70MB/sec over Firewire 800. Most current generation SSDs will exceed 500MB/sec read speeds. You will notice a little improvement due to the SSD having near instantaneous access times though. I wouldn't waste money on a SSD if FW800 is the only connection option. I guess you don't have Thunderbolt?
I did a side-by-side file transfer on Windows and Mac with USB 2.0 vs FireWire 400 and that was NOT my experience.  I don't know if USB 3.0 is less processor intensive, but 2.0 was a little more than 1/3 slower FW400 when I did testing a few years back.  I could easily transfer files quickly via FireWire from my mac to PC until windows decided that the card was unrecognizable out of the blue.

No Thunderbolt on the iMac.

---------------------
Windows wasn't really invited to the party, yet somehow it got in (that will probably be fixed on Patch Tuesday).

At any rate, this was why I brought up a Hackintosh (a hand-built PC with similar/same components as a mac) . . . they're still expensive to build if you use good parts.
Canon Rumors is presently creating photographer shortages in Middle Earth (all the trolls emigrated here)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13926
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #38 on: July 31, 2013, 10:03:26 AM »
Firewire 800 is faster than USB 2.0, but not THAT fast. ... I guess you don't have Thunderbolt?
I did a side-by-side file transfer on Windows and Mac with USB 2.0 vs FireWire 400 and that was NOT my experience.  I don't know if USB 3.0 is less processor intensive, but 2.0 was a little more than 1/3 slower FW400 when I did testing a few years back.  I could easily transfer files quickly via FireWire from my mac to PC until windows decided that the card was unrecognizable out of the blue.

No Thunderbolt on the iMac.

My backup HDDs are FW800.  Even a complete clone is pretty fast (~2 hrs).  Last week, I swapped my internal 500 GB HDD for a 960 GB SSD, but the exteral SATA connector I borrowed from IT was USB2.  Took close to 8 hrs to copy the drive. 
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

dstppy

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 892
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #39 on: July 31, 2013, 10:33:08 AM »
Update (Fusion Drive): You can only hack one into working if you can install internal SSDs.

We'll see how it goes tomorrow with the FW/SSD
Canon Rumors is presently creating photographer shortages in Middle Earth (all the trolls emigrated here)

dstppy

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 892
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #40 on: July 31, 2013, 12:54:51 PM »
So, my question is: for Linux, has anyone found a really good alternative to Lightroom OR are any of you running a high-end hackintosh?

The only thing keeping me from switching to Linux full time is Lightroom. There is nothing in the repositories that come close to it's ability to simplify and streamline your workflow. You can get the job done in UFRAW+GIMP, and I've even taken a look at DarkTable (a play on the "Lightroom" name), but no, there's nothing out there. Believe me, I've looked.

My (Linux) co-worker just bludgeoned me into trying DarkTable; I'm going to see if I can get that running on the Mac tonight, just to shut him up . . .
Canon Rumors is presently creating photographer shortages in Middle Earth (all the trolls emigrated here)

docfuz

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #41 on: July 31, 2013, 02:08:05 PM »
Hi everybody,
after months of lurking I think I just registered to reply to this thread.

Please note: I'm a *nix guy. I code. I dwelve in kernel land. I assess systems' security for a living. I think, though, this doesn't mean a thing in this thread. Cost should be a consideration.

I use Linux and OS X. My usual system while going mobile is a MBP with various VMs with Linux and Windows inside. I've been using Lightroom on OS X since three years and Bibble Pro (now Corel Aftershot Pro) on Linux for almost four. So the first real answer to the relevant OP question is: Corel Aftershot Pro. It's available for Linux now, has got commercial support, it's fast and it works. Is it like Lightroom? Conceptually yes. Is it the same? Hell, no. Better or worse? As a streamlined workflow app, probably not, but that's the case with almost all of Linux desktop apps. You just have to fiddle around, and if you've got no system administration skills whatsoever, it can be a pain sometimes, just to understand why the printer stopped working. In this case, migrating from OS X to Linux could be a thorn in your side.

Anyway, I second the advice of trying with RAM and SSD, first. Please note that 10-14 secs for a single RAW file doesn't quite sound right for RAM and storage subsystems. There is no evidence of a "old" CPU sub-system, unless something it's faulty in your system.

About moving to a wintel do-it-yourself box: it's fun and entertaining. Is it cheaper? I wouldn't say so. Whenever I go to make MY system with the latest and fastest and greatest techs in CPU, board, storage, networking and GPU I really come close to the same iMac, if I choose same quantities for everything and I do NOT get a comprehensive commercial support for the system as a whole. Moreover, for my photo hobby, I need RAM and storage, not the latest CPU or GPU unless I do a LOT of retouching with photoshop-likes apps.

People often say the macs are "closed" concerning HW and use older techs. I do NOT think so. Most often, last macs use AT MOST 2nd-3rd generation in every sub-system: CPUs, chipsets, storage, GPUs. What is the real problem? They are crippled by marketing: why on earth can't I get a notebook with 64GBs of RAM? So to keep battery stats real? So to force me to buy the coffee can? Probably.

But I just don't see why a 15'' mbp with 16GB RAM and SSD can't let you fly opening your raws. There is no such a system without flaws and that costs really less then others when specs are maxed out with latest technologies. The problem with OS X and Windows, though, is that filesystem/registry cleaning is not transparent to the user and RAM usage is sometimes, well, stupid. You should get really better with Linux if you knew what to do and what to look for, but only after configuring every other thing that you get for granted and already working out of the box with Win and OS X. So choose carefully.

Going to external storage: please buy/use USB3 / thunderbolt / e-sata / fw800 / usb2 in this order (cost-wise) and use, if possible, a single bus for your discs. Do not plug your external storage on the same bus shared by other devices: this is most true with USB2 and FW.

Last problem with macs: the great hw/sw integration, very closed and very tuned, though, to user satisfaction, means ANY kind of quirks whenever you're beginning to experience HW faults in the logic board, in some chipset, in the RAM, in the CPU itself. BUT you should see problems in many more contexts, not only while opening RAWs in Lightroom.

Oh, I shoot Canon, obviously  :D

doc

Halfrack

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 457
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #42 on: July 31, 2013, 03:59:25 PM »
Primary work is done on a pre-"i5/i7" iMac (back when intel was calling the stuff 'core'), keep forgetting to look at the specs when I'm at home.  Catalog and Raw Cache file are on primary drive (most likely a 5400rpm), but the raw files are on a USB HDD, which I've pretty much decided is the real issue. I tried bumping the cache size to 10GB as adobe suggested, with some speed improvements.

Ah, you have a model that you can actually open :D  Yea, I'd go as far as saying just clone your internal drive over to a SSD and carry on.  I've seen 13" Core 2 Macbooks come back from being 'too slow' for users to being fully functional with this minor change.
"Me owning a lens shop is kind of like having an alcoholic bar tender." - Roger Cicala

dstppy

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 892
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #43 on: July 31, 2013, 08:34:43 PM »
Specs: Early 2009 24" Mac 2.93 Core2Duo 8GB Ram.

Just took 20 seconds when hopping from one rendered image for the next to stop "Loading" and go crisp.

So we'll see tomorrow when we rule out disk access/bus speed.

-----------

I just did a quick resell check and I can probably get over $1000 for a 4 year old computer.  Now that I think about it, I could probably drop $1500, sell my Mini, Air and iMac and upgrade to current base Air/Mini and get a 27" iMac --- honestly, that's the same as buying a $600 video card and selling it every year or two for a $100 upgrade to the new latest and greatest . . . ahh nostalgia ;D
Canon Rumors is presently creating photographer shortages in Middle Earth (all the trolls emigrated here)

dstppy

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 892
    • View Profile
Re: Not Windows
« Reply #44 on: August 01, 2013, 11:15:08 PM »
AAAAAAAND it works.

The FW800 SSD:
Moved the Cache file & Catalog . . . some of it was faster.  Moved the CR2 (over 2 hrs since it was reading from the USB2 drive) and we're down to 1-3 seconds loading time per, which is usable.

The drive also has USB3, so it's forward-compattible.

So the bottleneck was definitely drive speed/bus. 

The wife's also given me the OK to sell/trade up, so I may be in business :)

Thanks again for the discussion guys.
Canon Rumors is presently creating photographer shortages in Middle Earth (all the trolls emigrated here)