Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Computers & Peripherals => Topic started by: Ed Taylor on March 05, 2013, 10:49:27 am

Title: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 05, 2013, 10:49:27 am
Hi,

I shoot a lot on location and require a larger monitor. Currently we drag my aging 2008 3.1 Mac Pro 2.8 Quad, (16Gb, 4x2Tb HD) and 30" ACD with us which is a pain.

I'm considering switching everything over to one of the new iMac 27" units with 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, 32Gb Ram 3TB Fusion Drive and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5.

I've demo'd the unit at the Apple store with large working files etc, and it's clearly faster. I will have to go from having working files on a separate HD and lose PS scratch disk. That said, Working in PS in the store still seemed very snappy, (and that unit only had 8Gb ram). Monitor seemed fine to work with. I'd back using two USB 3.0 external HD's with SuperDuper and Chronosync as I do now.

My work is lifestyle/portraiture. I shoot primarily with 5Ds Mk3, occasionally P65. Don't shoot a lot of setups per day. No catalog. Do retouch, and sometimes create layered work files up to 4+ Gb.

Clearly it seems a downgrade, but will make my location work, etc, much less stressful and faster.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Anyone think I'll have "buyer's remorse"?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Best,

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on March 05, 2013, 02:51:10 pm
I've just upgraded (yes, definitely upgraded) from my Mac Pro, which was a 2006 model with dual quad-core processors and 10Gb RAM, to a 27" iMac with the kind of spec you're talking about. I have "only" 24Gb RAM: I bought it with 8 installed and added two 8Gb modules from Crucial, which saved about £500 on Apple's charge; I have a 1TB fusion drive, which is enough for me, and I didn't upgrade the graphics card. I'm delighted: it's a huge speed boost. I use mostly LR.

I'd imagine it will be a hell of a lot easier to cart around than your current setup, too.

Of course you'll have "buyer's remorse". It's virtually impossible to buy a computer without it, since a better machine than whatever you buy is just round the corner. We all just have to live with that.

Jeremy
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 05, 2013, 02:53:17 pm
Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for your thoughts!

Care to weigh in on the screen? What were you using with the MP?

Thanks,

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on March 05, 2013, 05:55:36 pm
A pretty crappy, but cheap and reasonably functional, Dell 24". Needless to say, the iMac screen is an enormous improvement, particularly since I also bought an i1 Display Pro for calibration (I was using a Huey Pro). Now I can adjust the brightness so that I have some chance of matching my prints to my screen!

I continue to use the Dell as a secondary screen, to hold palettes, email and the grid view in LR. The Thunderbolt / mini Display Port to DVI adaptor cost £25.

Jeremy
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: george2787 on March 06, 2013, 06:22:10 am
I've been using a 2010 imac, 16 gb, 1tb for this task for 2 years now, 5d mkII files that weight the same and file size between 2-3 GB, just installed a SSD and haven't got time to play with it but seems fine :)

A friend of mine who does a lot of pano work just moved from a 2011 mac pro to an imac with similar specs and claims that the imac is slightly faster for what he does (32 GB RAM in both machines, imac with fusion drive)

The worst part I'd say is the screen when working with sun. For color critical work just plug in yur 30 or one of those new nec/eizo 27" and you're good to go at a fraction of a new mac pro.
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 06, 2013, 08:53:36 am
Thanks for your reply George.

Anyone have any thoughts as to whether the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5 upgrade is worth the additional $135.00?

I currently don't do any video.

Thanks
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: kers on March 06, 2013, 09:19:45 am
Thanks for your reply George.
Anyone have any thoughts as to whether the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5 upgrade is worth the additional $135.00?
I currently don't do any video.
Thanks

The basic videocard is already much more than you need - I you do games or video it could be interesting.
They put very fast videocards in iMacs - not in the Macpros
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 06, 2013, 09:43:22 am
Thanks Kers!

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: george2787 on March 06, 2013, 11:04:52 am
My friend asked me the same about the graphics card... considering programs like capture one benefit from a faster graphics card in exporting and rendering I'd get the big one, after all 135$ is not a lot compared to the whole budget and cannot be upgraded later ;)
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 06, 2013, 11:25:39 am
George,

Thanks, didn't know that C1 leveraged the video card. And yes, $135 isn't much.

Thanks,

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: nemo295 on March 06, 2013, 04:44:51 pm
Here are some benchmarks comparing a late 2012 27" iMac with a 3.4 GHz i7 CPU to a mid 2010 Mac Pro with a 3.33GHz 6-Core Xeon CPU.

The iMac scores 10% - 25% faster than the Mac Pro on most tests. Also taking into account that the iMac's built-in screen is light years ahead of your old Cinema Display in terms of brightness, contrast, evenness of illumination and color gamut, I say it's a no-brainer. Get the iMac.

http://barefeats.com/imac12p1.html
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 06, 2013, 06:40:38 pm
Thanks for the link Doug.

And given that my MP is early 2008, the difference is much larger as measured by Geekbench.

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ellis Vener on March 08, 2013, 01:36:30 pm
You'll need a case of course. Check out http://www.ilugger.com/ unless you need a flight ready case.
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 08, 2013, 02:34:02 pm
Thanks Ellis, already on my shopping list. Most of my shooting is local. Past that, it's just the MBP…

Even considered a new MBPr, but there's no new monitor yet with the reduced reflectiveness, and all of the cables, reduced storage space, etc…

Hope all's well,

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Graham Clark on March 09, 2013, 05:29:18 am
Hi,

I shoot a lot on location and require a larger monitor. Currently we drag my aging 2008 3.1 Mac Pro 2.8 Quad, (16Gb, 4x2Tb HD) and 30" ACD with us which is a pain.

I'm considering switching everything over to one of the new iMac 27" units with 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, 32Gb Ram 3TB Fusion Drive and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5.

I've demo'd the unit at the Apple store with large working files etc, and it's clearly faster. I will have to go from having working files on a separate HD and lose PS scratch disk. That said, Working in PS in the store still seemed very snappy, (and that unit only had 8Gb ram). Monitor seemed fine to work with. I'd back using two USB 3.0 external HD's with SuperDuper and Chronosync as I do now.

My work is lifestyle/portraiture. I shoot primarily with 5Ds Mk3, occasionally P65. Don't shoot a lot of setups per day. No catalog. Do retouch, and sometimes create layered work files up to 4+ Gb.

Clearly it seems a downgrade, but will make my location work, etc, much less stressful and faster.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Anyone think I'll have "buyer's remorse"?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Best,

Ed

Hello Ed,

For your use case a 27" iMac certainly seems like a better solution than the Mac Pro. The only real advantage of the Mac Pro over an iMac used to be the modularity of the enclosure, and the striping of SATA drives in a RAID-0 configuration, however the fusion drive effectively caches data in an SSD which has a realworld throughput of 450mb/s. The performance of the fusion drive SSD speed is equivalent to 3x 3.5" 7200RPM Seagate Barracuda drives in a RAID-0 configuration, and with the first Mac Pro sled for the OS, that means they're all full.

With Thunderbolt support on the iMac (Mac Pro doesn't have) you can attach a Thunderbolt RAID setup for block-level striping (I prefer) or mirroring. I use Aperture libraries on an external LaCie Thunderbolt RAID and see extremely fast throughputs on both read/write. Most of the files I work with are TIFF16BIT 100+ MB, so this is important to my workflow. In addition to drives, you can attach multiple Thunderbolt Displays for a total of two, or three displays including iMac display. You can even daisychain displays to hard drives 6x times without degradation of the link.

With USB3 (Mac Pro doesn't have) you can use a drive sled, like the one from OWC, and move towards modular storage for client or project-based data. Buy 2TB 3.5" drives in bulk and you can use a labeler to organize them all properly.

32GB of RAM certainly futureproofs your machine as components are soldered onto this unit, however most 64-bit applications can't address memory beyond 4GB - it's an architectural limitation. Also, keep in mind that OS X will set aside a swap space (which it uses to store all active processes when in sleep) on the hard drive. If you have 8GB of RAM, you lose 8GB of HD space. So 32GB of RAM means you lose 32GB of HD space. Not an issue but something to be aware of! : )

With all of that said, I personally have a Mac Pro with 32GB of RAM. I removed the optical bay and installed 3x OWC Mercury Electra 3G 120GB SSD's in a RAID-0 configuration for an effective throughput of 800MB/sec on the read/write. This has the OS on it and I use it for processing foreground projects. All the 3.5" drive sleds have 2TB drives in a RAID-5 configuration. I backup to a Synology NAS using CCC. In addition I have a 2.0GHz/8GB/512GB MacBook Air + Thunderbolt that I use with the above mentioned LaCie Thunderbolt RAID.

Graham
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 09, 2013, 03:25:12 pm
Graham,

Thanks for your well thought out and informative reply.

I didn't know that about the Fusion's throughput. Or the HD use for swap space as well.

Currently, I have 4 - 3Tb Hd's in the MP. It allows me to keep most files for some years back online. The truth of the matter is that I rarely if at all, need these. So as you say, they would be better in a separate enclosure. I currently use external HD's for backup and store these in a safety deposit box. So raw drives in cases would be equally as easy.

I use SuperDuper to clone my boot drive and Chronosync to backup my working drives.

Can you tell me how you like the Synology NAS? It would seem slow to my way of thinking, but clearly your system is all about speed.

Again, thanks.

Best,

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: budjames on March 09, 2013, 07:23:12 pm
I ordered the exact same specifications for my BTO iMac 27" about 3 weeks ago. It didn't arrive yet.

I'm replacing an early 2007 MacPro 8-core with 32GB RAM, an OWC 240GB SSD boot drive and 2x3TB raid and 2x4TB raid internal set up. This set up drives an Eizo ColorEdge CE240W (24") monitor. It works well, but I really want to run Mountain Lion like I have on my 2012 Macbook Air 13" i7 with 8GB RAM.

Anyone want to but my MacPro?

Cheers,
Bud
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Graham Clark on March 09, 2013, 09:59:35 pm
Graham,

Thanks for your well thought out and informative reply.

I didn't know that about the Fusion's throughput. Or the HD use for swap space as well.

Currently, I have 4 - 3Tb Hd's in the MP. It allows me to keep most files for some years back online. The truth of the matter is that I rarely if at all, need these. So as you say, they would be better in a separate enclosure. I currently use external HD's for backup and store these in a safety deposit box. So raw drives in cases would be equally as easy.

I use SuperDuper to clone my boot drive and Chronosync to backup my working drives.

Can you tell me how you like the Synology NAS? It would seem slow to my way of thinking, but clearly your system is all about speed.

Again, thanks.

Best,

Ed

Hey Ed,

Sounds like your backup solution is pretty solid! The Voyager S3 drive sled is USB3 and I highly recommend it with 2.5" SSDs and 3.5" spinners.

The speed of a RAID-5 NAS is really dependent on your network connection as it's going through CAT5 ethernet, but the read/write speeds are definitely higher than 100mb/s, so no real degradation of speed. The only real advantage of doing a NAs/network volume over a physically connected drive is that you can have it stored in your basement or attic and not have all the hardware near your workstation.

Graham
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 10, 2013, 04:24:20 pm
Graham,

Thanks for the reply.

I'm pretty confident with my BU system. I would like to have two more iterations of Chronosync BU drives, but I'd need a larger SD box and there aren't any currently available. Switching to raw drives or those WD Passport USB 3.0 drives will allow me another. I also keep quarterly BU's at a relatives house in another state.

If God wants my data after all that, he probably wants me to switch careers…

I have the USB 2.0/eSATA Thermalake version of the Voyager you use. Very, very handy.

I really like your idea of the NAS. I have my router/modem combo in a secluded part of the house. If I leave the iMac on 24/7, it can back up on the overnight and not slow anything down. Also, I won't have to worry about attaching/removing too many cables when I take the iMac with me. Thanks for that.

Best,

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Graham Clark on March 10, 2013, 04:30:46 pm
Graham,

Thanks for the reply.

I'm pretty confident with my BU system. I would like to have two more iterations of Chronosync BU drives, but I'd need a larger SD box and there aren't any currently available. Switching to raw drives or those WD Passport USB 3.0 drives will allow me another. I also keep quarterly BU's at a relatives house in another state.

If God wants my data after all that, he probably wants me to switch careers…

I have the USB 2.0/eSATA Thermalake version of the Voyager you use. Very, very handy.

I really like your idea of the NAS. I have my router/modem combo in a secluded part of the house. If I leave the iMac on 24/7, it can back up on the overnight and not slow anything down. Also, I won't have to worry about attaching/removing too many cables when I take the iMac with me. Thanks for that.

Best,

Ed

Sure! Something I forgot to recommend with the 27" iMac is a display hood. I like these ones as they're foldable and easy to transport: http://www.photodon.com/p/112-TB27.html

Due to the glass glare can be an issue if the shooting/working environment has lots of light (hopefully it does! :)

Graham
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 10, 2013, 04:43:18 pm
Graham,

Thanks again. I had forgotten to put that on my list.

One of the odd things about using the 30" ACD on location, is that, even with a hood, stray, off-axis light desaturates the screen making it difficult to judge exposure visually. I usually shoot to the histogram for this reason. In some ways, the iMac screen will be better in this respect; once reflections are controlled, off-axis light shouldn't be as much of a problem.

Theoretically…

Best,
Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Graham Clark on March 10, 2013, 05:05:26 pm
Graham,

Thanks again. I had forgotten to put that on my list.

One of the odd things about using the 30" ACD on location, is that, even with a hood, stray, off-axis light desaturates the screen making it difficult to judge exposure visually. I usually shoot to the histogram for this reason. In some ways, the iMac screen will be better in this respect; once reflections are controlled, off-axis light shouldn't be as much of a problem.

Theoretically…

Best,
Ed

Makes sense! : )

Graham
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ellis Vener on March 11, 2013, 10:23:31 am
With Thunderbolt support on the iMac (Mac Pro doesn't have) you can attach a Thunderbolt RAID setup for block-level striping (I prefer) or mirroring.

I hope you don't mean block level striping alone (RAID 0) as that is a bad choice for a prime storage device: lose one drive and you lose everything. I agree with you about mirroring (RAID 1): It's not very efficient although it does offer redundancy. I think you'll find RAID 5 which includes block level striping striping plus distributed parity for redundancy. In a RAID 5 array you can lose one drive and your data will still be safe, but you need a minimum of three drives and preferably 4.
RAID 6 is like RAID 5 but you have duplicate parity and that lets you lose up to 2 drives simultaneously, but you need a minimum of four drives a preferably 5. Neither RAID 5 or RAID 6 are quite as fast as RAID 0 but they are fast enough for my purposes.

RAID 10 uses striping + mirroring 

I am currently testing the new Drobo 5N and so far so good. The 5N is a NAS box  with only a gigabit Ethernet connection while the 5D model has Thunderbolt and USB 3.0 connections. Both have three other features that are noteworthy
- ability to choose either  single level or  dual distributed parity ( their equivalent of RAID 5 and RAID 6 respectively).
- A built in power supply to keep the box alive long enough to finish writing critical data in the case of sudden power loss
- a sixth drive slot in the base of the unit for installing an mSATA SSD (they recommend a 64GB SSD -  they say that smaller than that doesn't really help and that larger than that is excessive). The purpose of this mSATA SSD  is like the SSD portion of the Fusion drive set up: it handles frequently accessed items like the Drobo's operating system and Lightroom previews.

Data Robotics has a new CEO they  also now offers better support than they did as of last summer.

I also have one of the older Drobo v2 units in constant use and so far the 5N looks like an actual improvement over the v2 Drobos. I'm not a Drobo fan boy - I am also using  other RAID and NAS systems and back up systems at work too. I know all about Kelby's rant complaints from last year but they do seem to have taken Kelby's public beatdown and actually learned from the experience.
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 11, 2013, 01:11:40 pm
Ellis,

I prefer RAID 20, it requires 20 drives, but you can lose 19. Of course with the overhead, you only have 256k of actual storage…

But seriously, I prefer a JBOD system using Chronosync to back up those drives in multiple sets. It doesn't gain me any speed, but I sleep well at night. I tend to avoid any data storage scheme that employs any sort of proprietary technology, too many horror stories.

That said, the new Drobo sounds interesting. I'm still on the fence about NAS though. I have this feeling that it may just be too slow for my liking. Any thoughts on actual usage?

As always, thanks for your informative comments.

Best,
Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Graham Clark on March 11, 2013, 01:30:14 pm
With Thunderbolt support on the iMac (Mac Pro doesn't have) you can attach a Thunderbolt RAID setup for block-level striping (I prefer) or mirroring.

I hope you don't mean block level striping alone (RAID 0) as that is a bad choice for a prime storage device: lose one drive and you lose everything. I agree with you about mirroring (RAID 1): It's not very efficient although it does offer redundancy. I think you'll find RAID 5 which includes block level striping striping plus distributed parity for redundancy. In a RAID 5 array you can lose one drive and your data will still be safe, but you need a minimum of three drives and preferably 4.
RAID 6 is like RAID 5 but you have duplicate parity and that lets you lose up to 2 drives simultaneously, but you need a minimum of four drives a preferably 5. Neither RAID 5 or RAID 6 are quite as fast as RAID 0 but they are fast enough for my purposes.

RAID 10 uses striping + mirroring 

I am currently testing the new Drobo 5N and so far so good. The 5N is a NAS box  with only a gigabit Ethernet connection while the 5D model has Thunderbolt and USB 3.0 connections. Both have three other features that are noteworthy
- ability to choose either  single level or  dual distributed parity ( their equivalent of RAID 5 and RAID 6 respectively).
- A built in power supply to keep the box alive long enough to finish writing critical data in the case of sudden power loss
- a sixth drive slot in the base of the unit for installing an mSATA SSD (they recommend a 64GB SSD -  they say that smaller than that doesn't really help and that larger than that is excessive). The purpose of this mSATA SSD  is like the SSD portion of the Fusion drive set up: it handles frequently accessed items like the Drobo's operating system and Lightroom previews.

Data Robotics has a new CEO they  also now offers better support than they did as of last summer.

I also have one of the older Drobo v2 units in constant use and so far the 5N looks like an actual improvement over the v2 Drobos. I'm not a Drobo fan boy - I am also using  other RAID and NAS systems and back up systems at work too. I know all about Kelby's rant complaints from last year but they do seem to have taken Kelby's public beatdown and actually learned from the experience.

Hello Ellis,

Using a Synology RS812+ for redundancy over gigabit. Mirrored sets don't have usable throughput for a video workflow on 3.5" drives

Synology RS812+  http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822108115

Graham

Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ellis Vener on March 11, 2013, 04:29:57 pm
"I prefer RAID 20, it requires 20 drives, but you can lose 19. Of course with the overhead, you only have 256k of actual storage…"

good one!
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ellis Vener on March 11, 2013, 04:31:12 pm
"Hello Ellis,

Using a Synology RS812+ for redundancy over gigabit. Mirrored sets don't have usable throughput for a video workflow on 3.5" drives"


Agreed.
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on March 11, 2013, 04:36:48 pm
Gives you a sense of my data-loss comfort zone.

;-)

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ellis Vener on March 11, 2013, 09:36:19 pm
Gives you a sense of my data-loss comfort zone.

;-)

Ed

 ;D
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: evonzz on April 16, 2013, 11:01:38 am
Has anyone had any experience using the newer Phase One IQ backs tethered to new iMacs?

I am interested to hear whether all the positive performance reports above also can be applied to MFDB files and capture.
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Craig Lamson on April 16, 2013, 01:37:56 pm
Graham,

Thanks for your well thought out and informative reply.

I didn't know that about the Fusion's throughput. Or the HD use for swap space as well.

Currently, I have 4 - 3Tb Hd's in the MP. It allows me to keep most files for some years back online. The truth of the matter is that I rarely if at all, need these. So as you say, they would be better in a separate enclosure. I currently use external HD's for backup and store these in a safety deposit box. So raw drives in cases would be equally as easy.

I use SuperDuper to clone my boot drive and Chronosync to backup my working drives.

Can you tell me how you like the Synology NAS? It would seem slow to my way of thinking, but clearly your system is all about speed.

Again, thanks.

Best,

Ed

HAve you considered a Mac Mini, with an ssd and second drive upgrade from OWC?

I just bought one for general stuff and its pretty dang fast in stock form.  I did not do the ssd/second drive upgrade but did up the ram to 16gb.  I use it to drive a NEC 271, the same monitor I use for my workstation computer.

Geekbench of my unit (64 bit) 11764

It a really sweet little machine and I would think very travel friendly.

I shoot all tethered but use a 2011 BP 15"
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on April 16, 2013, 02:51:20 pm
Hi Craig,

I briefly considered the mini, but there would still be two pieces, I'd need to get a new monitor as the 30 is still large, etc..

If I was going to go that route, I'd probably use a MBPr. It would get me about the same speed as the iMac, but with a max ram of 16Gb, and when I needed to shoot without monitor, edit on plane, etc, all my files would already be there.

It's a good idea though! If I already had a smaller monitor, I'd probably go that way.

Berst,
Ed
Title: MPB vs Mac mini + MB Air + syncing
Post by: BJL on April 17, 2013, 09:42:15 am
I briefly considered the mini, but there would still be two pieces ...
If I was going to go that route, I'd probably use a MBPr.
If the advantages of the "one computer" option is sufficiently attractive, the MPB + docking system is attractive, especially with Thunderbolt giving a simple two cable docking option. But the price and bulk of a sufficiently powerful MPB make me think of spending the same money on a comparably spec'd Mac mini plus an MB Air that travels far better --- the 11" version fits into a slot in many camera bags.

Sharing files between the two computers might rule this out for those who need constant access to hundreds of GB of image files, but with some discipline in separating out my current projects from "back burner" and "archives", I can keep the files and folders that I need on the road synced between all my computers with cloud services like SugarSync. I prefer SugarSync to Dropbox for this job, as it allows syncing a selection of folders, rather than just a single "Dropbox" folder.

Is there a simple "local option" for keeping a collection of folders on a laptop synced to ones on the desktop computer where one is currently working, without the intermediary of a cloud service?
Title: Re: MPB vs Mac mini + MB Air + syncing
Post by: Ed Taylor on April 17, 2013, 12:05:11 pm
If the advantages of the "one computer" option is sufficiently attractive, the MPB + docking system is attractive, especially with Thunderbolt giving a simple two cable docking option. But the price and bulk of a sufficiently powerful MPB make me think of spending the same money on a comparably spec'd Mac mini plus an MB Air that travels far better --- the 11" version fits into a slot in many camera bags.

Sharing files between the two computers might rule this out for those who need constant access to hundreds of GB of image files, but with some discipline in separating out my current projects from "back burner" and "archives", I can keep the files and folders that I need on the road synced between all my computers with cloud services like SugarSync. I prefer SugarSync to Dropbox for this job, as it allows syncing a selection of folders, rather than just a single "Dropbox" folder.

Is there a simple "local option" for keeping a collection of folders on a laptop synced to ones on the desktop computer where one is currently working, without the intermediary of a cloud service?

BJL,

I decided against the MBP + monitor for two reasons:
1. 16Gb RAM limit. I retouch a lot of files in the 2-3Gb range. 16 would work, but 32 is better.
2. Apple hasn't released a TB monitor equivalent to the iMac screen. The previous version's glare is a deal breaker for me.

If I did go the MBP route, I'd carry a 13" Air with me as a backup machine, so we're of like minds on that.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Mini is a great solution. Positioned on a TwelveSouth Backpack, it's a neat package as well.

If a new TB display were released, I would consider it, but probably end up with a MBP with anti-glare an add a second drive in the optical bay.

Just me…

Best,
Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: Ed Taylor on April 17, 2013, 12:07:40 pm
Then too there's the chatter about the next iteration of the iMac having a retina display. Current processor won't handle it. Intel says next one will.

It never ends…

Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac ... and "Retina" or "4K" display options coming?
Post by: BJL on April 18, 2013, 10:27:50 am
Ed, I agree for your use case; I was wandering off-topic a bit. And despite my Mac mini talk, my newest kit is an iMac.

Then too there's the chatter about the next iteration of the iMac having a retina display.

That makes sense. Whatever we think of it, 4K video is becoming important in the video world, and with it demand for displays resolutions of at least 3840x2160. That surely means that Apple will soon offer a display of at least 3840x2160, and given the Apple's push to move most high end users to iMacs rather than Mac Pros, I would expect a "Retina" or "4K" iMac this year.

Aside: hopefully such a screen will have a less "wide and shallow" shape than the 16:9 of HD video format, at the cost of more than 2160 pixels vertical, since I find that 16:9 shape inconvenient for almost everything except video. Even for video, some room above/below the image area for controls (or subtitles) is nice.
Title: Re: 27" iMac ... and "Retina" or "4K" display options coming?
Post by: Ed Taylor on April 18, 2013, 12:30:34 pm
Ed, I agree for your use case; I was wandering off-topic a bit. And despite my Mac mini talk, my newest kit is an iMac.

That makes sense. Whatever we think of it, 4K video is becoming important in the video world, and with it demand for displays resolutions of at least 3840x2160. That surely means that Apple will soon offer a display of at least 3840x2160, and given the Apple's push to move most high end users to iMacs rather than Mac Pros, I would expect a "Retina" or "4K" iMac this year.

Aside: hopefully such a screen will have a less "wide and shallow" shape than the 16:9 of HD video format, at the cost of more than 2160 pixels vertical, since I find that 16:9 shape inconvenient for almost everything except video. Even for video, some room above/below the image area for controls (or subtitles) is nice.

BJL,

No problem, sometimes going sideways yields interesting results.

Yes, given I don't do motion, something less than 16:9 would be nice. But in the end, the mass of users will drive what is offered. Probably bordering on blasphemy here, but I think most photographers these days are well served by an iMac. It's an incredibly powerful machine. I'd still like to see Apple bring a new MP to market though if for no other reason other than to keep the power users from migrating away from Mac.

Best,
Ed
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: schrodingerscat on May 05, 2013, 04:35:25 pm
I used a 27" i7 for awhile and really liked it, other than the gloss screen, which was manageable with environment control. The IPS panel was excellent and calibrated well. As it's recommended to have the library drive in LR physically in the same machine, I installed a Seagate 750GB Hybrid for the system and used the 3.5" for the library. Still had the optical in it. With RAM maxed out it worked very well. Backups were to a twin Firewire box and a dock, where two sets of drives are rotated between home and a safe deposit box, using SuperDuper. I'm also not a fan of proprietary BU solutions. Easy yes, ...

As I'm in a downsizing mode and started to accumulate too many computers, the 27" went as it was the largest. Have been using Mini Servers as well, although you can put a second drive in the client machines. The server has a better spec'd MOBO and chipset, especially the newest i7 version. Now running an NEC 24" PA241w which is brilliant, and finally losing separation anxiety over the 27".
Title: Re: 27" iMac as replacement for Mac Pro and 30" ACD on location and main computer
Post by: TMARK on June 11, 2013, 11:25:08 am
You'll need a case of course. Check out http://www.ilugger.com/ unless you need a flight ready case.

Yes.  These cases work.  We also had Lightware cases that were very nice.