Laptop verses Desktop

[PhotoCruiser]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 1 Stunde schrieb frame-it:

or an HP Zbook, full loaded with dreamcolor display, dual SSD's, loads of ram and powerful video card..check which software actually uses the card, some use only the CPU's, so if its gonna be  multipurpose laptop, get a monster GPU and 8 core i9 Cpus

This is what i had before, a very nice machine just the keyboard is a bit less comfortable than the Lenovo ones but a great machine.

However the same power of a MacPro can be achieved for much less $$$ assembling a dedicated PC using highend components and a Eizo/NEC screen.
And the market is full of cool looking housings to give the computer a personalized touch.
Color calibration is not expensive today, i still use a Spyder4 and it does the trick, but if i should print a high quality photo book i would first talk with the printing company
to discuss their use us color calibration methods.

 

vor 1 Stunde schrieb jaapv:

Most photo processing software uses the video card. Both Photoshop/Adobe and C1 use Open CL

This is true, but if you have a dual grafic card setup and watch the load on the highend grafic card then you see that it barely get used.
Even if in the settings Lightroom/Cature 1  is set to run on the highend graphics card.
I don't know if this is a problem of Windows or the software who decides what card is doing what work, but my Quadro 4000M is barely used in dual graphics mode.
The idea of running windows, browser, office applications, etc on the slower Intel Graphic processor and graphics/video/3D applications on the highend graphics processor sound
interesting, but until now under windows i could not see real benefits.

Chris

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[frame-it]

3 minutes ago, PhotoCruiser said:

 

However the same power of a MacPro can be achieved for much less $$$ assembling a dedicated PC using highend components and a Eizo/NEC screen.
And the market is full of cool looking housings to give the computer a personalized touch.

 

 

very true..but desktops cant be taken on holidays or long travel trips if required

[PhotoCruiser]

vor 49 Minuten schrieb frame-it:

very true..but desktops cant be taken on holidays or long travel trips if required

very troo too, that is the reason why i have only a Laptop as i am always travelling!

If i would stay in one place i would have a desktop computer and continue to use my Surface Pro in holidays so view and edit the photos.
I use the Surface Pro usually when i go shopping in the 1.5 hour far and not very safe capital of Costa Rica to be able to manage my business
or if i go to dive destinations who are either unsafe or high risk that i drown my expensive workstation laptop.
All depends on where the photographer goes, i would not take my almost 8lbs heavy laptop to a several days long hike or a notrious wet place,
there are well working options like the Surface Pro series or the new IPad pro, both allow also editing.

Chris

[mhicks]

23 hours ago, Viking 1 said:

On the 7th January I am expecting my Q2 to be delivered. Being new to this Forum I have probably missed any/all the advice made on the best computor to download the photos taken from that massive  sensor. I am in the market to replace my old laptop so it makes sense to start the year off with the right kit in support of the new camera. Any advice would be welcomed.  

What do you envision doing with the photos you take?  A lot of printing?  Posting on websites/social media?  Do you make money with your photos? 
 

 

 

 

[iRandom]

I think you need to answer a few of fundamental questions first in order to get helpful feedback.

Do you want MacOS, Windows or Linux?

• This is a huge decision driver. Knowing the best PC available doesn't help you if you want a Mac and vice versa.

What do you plan on doing with the photos?

• Do you plan to print? If so you probably want hardware that most easily supports a calibrated work flow. If the photos will just live on your machine(s) and be shared electronically then this may not be as much of a concern since most places (monitors, pads, phones, TVs) the photos will be viewed aren't calibrated.

How do you plan to process?

• Will everything live on a single machine at home or will you process on the go or across multiple screens? Do you want to be tied to your desk or have the freedom to work anywhere? Knowing this helps drive your storage and connectivity strategy. I used to use LR Classic with the main library on my desktop and smart collections synced on my laptop and iPad. However, I found I didn't like this approach for the Q2 since the smart previews do not preserve enough resolution to be able to take advantage of extreme cropping that is possible w/ the 40MP images. I've since moved to an approach where my photos are synced to the cloud with a second copy living on my desktop (along with a local and online backup).

Do you plan to do video?

• A lot of machines will be suitable for photo work but not so good for video work. 

How much processing do you plan do?

• Your shooting volume and how many photos you need to process is a factor. Just shooting a little and doing a lot of processing on a small number of photos has different requirements than shooting a lot and relying more on fast culling and batch processing.

I've also been grappling with the laptop vs desktop question. I've found that my 2015 5K iMac (4 core i7, 32GB, 4GB graphics, 3TB fusion drive) gets bogged down when working on Q2 files. I've seen this using various software packages. A bit about my requirements first. Not knowing your specific requires I can't saw if this will be helpful. I'm a photo enthusiast and mostly only view my photos electronically. They are for me, sharing with friends and family and occasional online posting. I don't do video. I'm in the Apple world and don't plan on leaving it. Most people viewing my photos are also in the Apple world. I love the way that my photos look on Apple screens and on my LG OLED TV, but I do tend to like modern punchy and contrasty look (although dialed back to maintain the dynamic range). I do a lot of culling so being able to switch back and forth between photos without bogging down the machine is important to me. Whatever I buy will also be my home machine so it needs to work well for surfing, watching movies, record keeping and all the other stuff we now do on computers.

Here's what I've looked at...

• Mac Mini - Not enough latitude in the hardware configuration. Seems like it would not be much of a step up from my current iMac. No good graphics options and expensive once you add an eGPU. 
• iMac Pro - Seems like a great machine. However, it was introduced in 2017 and I don't want to get something that is dated. There's a lot of development in the area of ecosystem right now (things like Sidecar, Airdrop, using other devices to unlock/approve) and these new features don't always work with older hardware. Also, may be overkill if you're not planning to do video.
• Mac Pro - Overkill for photos. Would be more of a consideration if I did video.
• iMac 5K - One of the few Macs where you can still replace the RAM yourself. Current GPU offerings top out at 8GB. Does have an SD slot but I'm not sure if it is UHS-II.
• MacBook Pro 16" - My top contender right now, but I'm concerned with the RAM and GPU memory limitations.

I'm interested to hear other folks thoughts on this, but I think that GPU is one of the biggest considerations right now. It is my understanding that most photo software packages use the GPU for most of the photo processing and exporting. Also, I know it is a point of contention, but more and more AI is going to show up in photo processing software and this makes use of the GPU when done locally.

[snooper]

From what I understand... Because the PC world is mainly openCL (with CUDA for a bit of time left, Nvidia proprietary), people like Adobe focus on openCL. Apple implementation of openCL (being a competitor of Metal) is not really optimum. Reason why softwares such as final cut or logic do run perfectly on Macs, with performances they would not deliver on PC. Unfortunately for us, Aperture is gone and we have to share GPU non-optimized softwares with the PC world, where they are optimized. So whatever might be your graphic card, you'll get better performance with Adobe products - or other third party apps running on PC AND Macs - in the  PC world.

But Lightroom is no drag on Macs... You can compensate by having as much RAM as you can...

Edited January 2, 2020 by snooper

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, iRandom said:

I think you need to answer a few of fundamental questions first in order to get helpful feedback.

Do you want MacOS, Windows or Linux?

• This is a huge decision driver. Knowing the best PC available doesn't help you if you want a Mac and vice versa.

What do you plan on doing with the photos?

• Do you plan to print? If so you probably want hardware that most easily supports a calibrated work flow. If the photos will just live on your machine(s) and be shared electronically then this may not be as much of a concern since most places (monitors, pads, phones, TVs) the photos will be viewed aren't calibrated.

How do you plan to process?

• Will everything live on a single machine at home or will you process on the go or across multiple screens? Do you want to be tied to your desk or have the freedom to work anywhere? Knowing this helps drive your storage and connectivity strategy. I used to use LR Classic with the main library on my desktop and smart collections synced on my laptop and iPad. However, I found I didn't like this approach for the Q2 since the smart previews do not preserve enough resolution to be able to take advantage of extreme cropping that is possible w/ the 40MP images. I've since moved to an approach where my photos are synced to the cloud with a second copy living on my desktop (along with a local and online backup).

Do you plan to do video?

• A lot of machines will be suitable for photo work but not so good for video work. 

How much processing do you plan do?

• Your shooting volume and how many photos you need to process is a factor. Just shooting a little and doing a lot of processing on a small number of photos has different requirements than shooting a lot and relying more on fast culling and batch processing.

I've also been grappling with the laptop vs desktop question. I've found that my 2015 5K iMac (4 core i7, 32GB, 4GB graphics, 3TB fusion drive) gets bogged down when working on Q2 files. I've seen this using various software packages. A bit about my requirements first. Not knowing your specific requires I can't saw if this will be helpful. I'm a photo enthusiast and mostly only view my photos electronically. They are for me, sharing with friends and family and occasional online posting. I don't do video. I'm in the Apple world and don't plan on leaving it. Most people viewing my photos are also in the Apple world. I love the way that my photos look on Apple screens and on my LG OLED TV, but I do tend to like modern punchy and contrasty look (although dialed back to maintain the dynamic range). I do a lot of culling so being able to switch back and forth between photos without bogging down the machine is important to me. Whatever I buy will also be my home machine so it needs to work well for surfing, watching movies, record keeping and all the other stuff we now do on computers.

Here's what I've looked at...

• Mac Mini - Not enough latitude in the hardware configuration. Seems like it would not be much of a step up from my current iMac. No good graphics options and expensive once you add an eGPU. 
• iMac Pro - Seems like a great machine. However, it was introduced in 2017 and I don't want to get something that is dated. There's a lot of development in the area of ecosystem right now (things like Sidecar, Airdrop, using other devices to unlock/approve) and these new features don't always work with older hardware. Also, may be overkill if you're not planning to do video.
• Mac Pro - Overkill for photos. Would be more of a consideration if I did video.
• iMac 5K - One of the few Macs where you can still replace the RAM yourself. Current GPU offerings top out at 8GB. Does have an SD slot but I'm not sure if it is UHS-II.
• MacBook Pro 16" - My top contender right now, but I'm concerned with the RAM and GPU memory limitations.

I'm interested to hear other folks thoughts on this, but I think that GPU is one of the biggest considerations right now. It is my understanding that most photo software packages use the GPU for most of the photo processing and exporting. Also, I know it is a point of contention, but more and more AI is going to show up in photo processing software and this makes use of the GPU when done locally.

If you lack computing power on a Mac Mini (which will not happen for photo-editing) you are supposed to stack two  (or more) of them.

[frame-it]

my point was, people don't upgrade laptops every year..so its better to buy a beast so one is all set for 5-6 years.

[Marley]

I'm watching this thread as well. Decided on the desktop path. Question to other members: 

Is the mid tier 21.5" iMac capable or should I stretch to the mid level 27" model? Price difference is about $900.00 you get 5k monitor and bigger screen. 

Storage and RAM are the same. My workspace is a little cramp and I don't to gaming and video editing. 

[Jeff S]

My end product is a print, same as in darkroom days.  So my processing is still home based (in my home office, with printer), using a ‘vintage’ Mac Pro desktop that I’ve been upgrading for 10 years, in conjunction with an NEC monitor.  Toss in LR Classic, ImagePrint software and a backup system and I’m a happy camper. Print storage, wall mounted mat cutter, work space and framing supplies occupy another room.  My laptop serves other uses.

Jeff

[Exodies]

Mac mini, eGPU and Apple XDR screen - will it fly?

[iRandom]

13 hours ago, Marley said:

I'm watching this thread as well. Decided on the desktop path. Question to other members: 

Is the mid tier 21.5" iMac capable or should I stretch to the mid level 27" model? Price difference is about $900.00 you get 5k monitor and bigger screen. 

Storage and RAM are the same. My workspace is a little cramp and I don't to gaming and video editing. 

The 5K screen is very nice. I often have 2 browsers side-by-side or multiple apps open on a single screen. On my laptop I have to rely more on using multiple desktops.

I recommend going to an Apple Store or somewhere that has both on display and trying both to see if one calls to you more. You can open the Photos app to find a photo you like and display it on both screens to get an idea what it would be like for your needs.

[Marley]

went to the apple store and the 27" iMac is beautiful but huge for my workspace. I will just get the 21.5"  iMac but it should be maxed out specs wise. 

Is it possible to install the RAM by myself for this model? 

[snooper]

On 1/2/2020 at 12:11 PM, jaapv said:

BTW, I am sure that Mac Minis have Metal support, as Mojave and Catalina cannot be installed without it.

They surely do.

Unfortunately, whatever comes from Adobe is OpenCL now that CUDA is on the way down. This is why at equivalent power any PhotoShop product will be faster on a PC, they say.

Edited January 6, 2020 by snooper

[jaapv]

On 1/3/2020 at 5:01 AM, Jeff S said:

My end product is a print, same as in darkroom days.  So my processing is still home based (in my home office, with printer), using a ‘vintage’ Mac Pro desktop that I’ve been upgrading for 10 years, in conjunction with an NEC monitor.  Toss in LR Classic, ImagePrint software and a backup system and I’m a happy camper. Print storage, wall mounted mat cutter, work space and framing supplies occupy another room.  My laptop serves other uses.

Jeff

My problem is not the limitation of an older Mac, but lack of wall space...😟

[Jeff S]

8 minutes ago, jaapv said:

My problem is not the limitation of an older Mac, but lack of wall space...😟

I don’t like to think about how much my hobbies (photography, book and photo collections, music/audio, etc) have cost me in housing size , above and beyond the direct hobby expenditures.  😥

Jeff

[jaapv]

Yes, and a spouse who wants to be able to see spots of wall paint occasionally...

[zeitz]

On 1/2/2020 at 7:36 PM, frame-it said:

my point was, people don't upgrade laptops every year..so its better to buy a beast so one is all set for 5-6 years.

I lease my Mac so I get a new Mac every two years.  I got tired doing endless hardware updates to PCs.  Unfortunately Apple is sluggish about updating Mac hardware so this scheme has some flaws.

On 1/3/2020 at 9:00 AM, Exodies said:

Mac mini, eGPU and Apple XDR screen - will it fly?

My latest Mac is a high end 2018 Mac Mini (6 i7 cores and 32 GB of RAM), now running Catalina.  The Mac Mini running Mojave was faster than the Late 2013 Mac Pro that it replaced.  The new Mac Pro is way more computer than I need.  I use a Sonnet eGFX 650 eGPU with a Radeon WX8200 graphics card.  In the summer I posted a speed comparison of various configurations opening 72 high res raw files in Bridge.  The Mac Mini with the eGPU was the winner, but not blowing the others away.  I do not use DaVinci Resolve which is usually used for benchmarking.  

Concerning the XDR monitor.  I have become interested in one of those myself because my Eizo CX271 is getting a little old.  Apple says the XDR monitor will work with their Blackmagic eGPU (sold exclusively by Apple); the high end Blackmagic box contains a Radeon RX Vega 56 card.  However I have not determined if the XDR monitor will work with a Radeon WX8200 graphics card.  I should contact Sonnet support to find out for sure.  For reference the RX Vega 56 was released in the Fall of 2017 while the WX8200 was released in the Fall of 2018.  The comparative specs are essentially the same with some minor improvements in the WX8200.  The decisive factors in selecting the eGPU for me were:  Apple would not let my value added dealer sell my a Blackmagic;  the Blackmagic box is not upgradeable while the Sonnet 650 box is upgradeable.   While I don't like upgrading internals anymore, I could not lease the Blackmagic box because my value added dealer couldn't supply it to me.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[kinch123]

I second Jaapv's vote for iPad Pro. I have the 11" version and a fully maxed out everything mid-2014 15" MacBook Pro. The 2018 iPad Pros are very powerful beasts for image and video editing on the go. I'm not much interested in video, but if I were, the iPad would get things done quite a bit faster than the 5.5 year old MacBook Pro.

I'm contemplating the new 16" MacBook Pro now that Apple  have finally resolved the butterfly keyboard debacle and rediscovered the Escape Key (I use Vim a lot), but can imagine that 2 or 3 years down the track will be doing virtually everything including most of my real job on a 5G-equipped 202x iPad Pro. Apple's low-power multicore ARM processor advantage is only going to improve. Those who print and care about very precise control of their colour calibration will have other considerations of course.

[kinch123]

On 1/7/2020 at 12:00 AM, snooper said:

They surely do.

Unfortunately, whatever comes from Adobe is OpenCL now that CUDA is on the way down. This is why at equivalent power any PhotoShop product will be faster on a PC, they say.

Would be nice if Apple and Nvidia could make nice with each other. It's a minor pain not to have easy TensorFlow and other Machine Learning installs on Macs because no real Nvidia support. All above my pay grade, but they seem to have a major blood feud going on.