Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Anyone using the New MacBook while traveling with basic 100MP image processing?  (Read 3433 times)

algrove

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206

It seems Apple notebooks cost about $1k per pound, so I was considering leaving my MBP behind at 4 lbs and acquiring a 2lb maxed out 16GB RAM Macbook with C1 and PS on it with not much else besides Mail and Safari.

Anyone acquired one with use with their 100MP DB yet?
Logged

gagemanning

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50

I own a MacBook (the original and the new one with 16gb ram) and IQ3-100.  I would not even consider it.  The Macbook is good for my typical use of medical stuff, email, and browsing the web and even with that it gets a little "bogged" down.  I couldn't even imagine trying to process IQ3-100 images on it.  I also own a Macbook pro spec out and it does fine for IQ3-100 images.  It would be better if they made a 32gb ram version though.

gage
Logged

cgarnerhome

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
    • cgarnerphoto

I also have the IQ3-100 and the new Macbook Pro with 16GB of ram.  For travel, I have no problem processing images, even though it's a little slower than my desktop.  My images often reach 2Gs.  Obviously, it would be much better with 32gb of ram but for travel it works.  My normal workflow is to do to basic processing on my laptop while traveling and finish my images on my desktop.

Joe Towner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 723

Do you enable OpenCL in CaptureOne?  I'd uncheck it and see how your current laptop performs.  With the Macbook, you don't have said dedicated graphics hardware.

Personally I was looking at grabbing an Air due to the USB3 and SD ports, and was disappointed that there wasn't a refresh on them (again).  Weight & performance you may want to look at the 13" Pro  for $200 more (same config, max i7/16gb/512ssd, no touchbar) you get a 2.5ghz i7 instead of the 1.4ghz and you get the Iris graphics rather than the HD graphics.
Logged
t: @PNWMF

algrove

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206

Thanks all. I see some say yes and some no. I have a fast MBP which processes my 100MP files no problem, but I do basic edits and selections while on the road with the occasional PS light use.

If ever the airport ban goes into effect I was looking ahead and collecting information. Would never check my MBP, but if one had to check a computer then I was thinking the Macbook 16GB might suffice mainly with C1 and perhaps a little PS thrown in.
Logged

chrismuc

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 171

using late 2013 MacBook Pro with IQ180 files
with ACR no problem
of course not very quick but absolutely acceptable
(no experience with C1 but I think it's quite much slower than ACR)
Logged

DanielStone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 656

Why not go with a Microsoft Surface Pro?
Logged

vjbelle

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 406

I have a Macbook (2016) and found that 3100 files were just too much for it.  However I set a process recipe in C1 to size the file to 20MP which was just fine for the Macbook.  I could use all filters and numerous layers fairly easily.  I never needed the full sized file while on the road and the weight differential from my older Macbook Pro was welcomed.  Subsequently I have decided to go the PC route with a Dell XPS 13 with touch screen 16GB ram and 512 SSD which easily handles full size 3100 files.  The computer was $1400.00 at Costco with full 90 day return.  I just couldn't pass that up and am very happy with the computer which has gotten rave reviews.  I also have a Surface pro 4 which I found buggy......

Victor

Edit:  All of these computers with high rez screens are extremely difficult to use for establishing whether or not an image is in critical focus.  This is, after all, this most important use of a computer while out in the field.  Finding out that an image didn't meet critical focus when you're back from a trip doesn't do any good.  Practice to determine what a slightly out of focus image looks like on those screens......
« Last Edit: June 24, 2017, 11:27:13 AM by vjbelle »
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3838
    • waynefox.com

Thanks all. I see some say yes and some no. I have a fast MBP which processes my 100MP files no problem, but I do basic edits and selections while on the road with the occasional PS light use.

hmmm, I didn't see anyone say yes to the MacBook in any of the replies. 

I assume you are wondering if the recent processor update to the MacBook might make it a little better for IQ3 100 files.  Geekbench specs the 2017 MacBook multicore results at 6714.  To compare, the 2016 MacBook specs at 6493.  As a comparison, the new MacBook Pro 2017 specs out at 15618, and even 2012 MacBook Pros are around 11,000.

To me it just doesn't seem like enough of a performance gain to realize any significant difference editing IQ3 100 files. Whether it's "acceptable" while on the road, I find the new 2017 MacBook Pro is really nice when traveling.

algrove

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206

Reply #2 said he uses the 16GB RAM Macbook Pro with IQ3100 files and I read Macbook, not Macbook Pro. Must have been wishful thinking.

I have a MBP and want to leave it's weight behind. The Macbook is half the weight of my MBP.  I am not willing to switch to a Microsoft anything.

Still thinking about it.
Logged

jng

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143

I recently started using a Macbook (1.2 GHz m5 processor w/8 Gb RAM) to tether in the field. Based on the few IQ3 100 files I've futzed with, I'd say that it's serviceable for basic edits in C1 although it's not exactly speedy. I tend to save the heavier lifting for when I'm at home and using my MBP plugged into a 27" color-calibrated monitor, in any case. For me the weight savings over the Macbook Pro are worth the tradeoff and checking focus zoomed in at 100% seems to work fine. YMMV, of course...

John
Logged

algrove

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206

I recently started using a Macbook (1.2 GHz m5 processor w/8 Gb RAM) to tether in the field. Based on the few IQ3 100 files I've futzed with, I'd say that it's serviceable for basic edits in C1 although it's not exactly speedy. I tend to save the heavier lifting for when I'm at home and using my MBP plugged into a 27" color-calibrated monitor, in any case. For me the weight savings over the Macbook Pro are worth the tradeoff and checking focus zoomed in at 100% seems to work fine. YMMV, of course...

John

Thanks.  Well, if 8GB of RAM works even though slowly, then 16GB of RAM should be slightly better with 1.4Ghz i7 processor. At home I use a Mac Pro for heavy lifting.
Logged

jng

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143

Thanks.  Well, if 8GB of RAM works even though slowly, then 16GB of RAM should be slightly better with 1.4Ghz i7 processor. At home I use a Mac Pro for heavy lifting.

I wouldn't say it's slow per se, but perhaps not as snappy as my mid-2014 Macbook Pro running an i7 2.5 GHz processor with 16 Gb RAM, which I'm sure is pretty pokey compared to the Mac Pro.

TBH when using the Macbook I typically find myself squinting at the smallish (albeit high resolution Retina) screen to really notice the speed or lack thereof.  ;)

John
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3838
    • waynefox.com

Maybe a 13 MacBook Pro?  3 lbs, so not quite as light as MacBook (2lbs vs 3 lbs), but 1.5 lbs lighter than the 2015 MacBook Pros.

I was surprised dropping the pound from the previous style MacBook pro to the new one was noticeable.

C1 may do better than Ps, as C1 is better at leveraging cores.  I think Ps might bog down pretty bad on a MacBook with a tiff from a 100mp back.

gagemanning

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50

I agree, the 13 inch MacBook Pro would be fine and well worth it compared to the MacBook.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

algrove

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206

Based on the new 13" Macbook Pro's increased speed and only 1 lb more than the MacBook, perhaps that's the answer even though my 2016 MBP is very much liked my me.

Wayne's speed comparisons tell the story. Thanks.
Logged

Geods

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21

I took a five month motorcycle trip over three years ago, and brought a 13" MacBook Pro (i7, 16GB). I just checked the speed scores and it is slower than the new 2017 MacBook. While my MacBook Pro was very slow stitching files with 100s of megapixels, it got the job done. I often used it at campsites with no power and it never let me down. I returned home with all my images fully edited and backed up. I would have liked something smaller, in both size and weight. That said, if I were to do it again, I'd take an optioned-out MacBook, and let it grind away at those images...So it's slow compared to the larger "pro" models, it can get the job done.
Logged

algrove

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206

Just as I was thinking of going the 13" maxed out MacBook Pro, you brought me back down to earth and again contemplating a maxed out MacBook. The high end 13" MacBook Pro has 4 c ports which is much more appealing to the one c port on the MacBook, but at a $1k more cost which of course comes with much more speedy CPU, GPU and larger SSD available.
Logged

jng

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143

Just as I was thinking of going the 13" maxed out MacBook Pro, you brought me back down to earth and again contemplating a maxed out MacBook. The high end 13" MacBook Pro has 4 c ports which is much more appealing to the one c port on the MacBook, but at a $1k more cost which of course comes with much more speedy CPU, GPU and larger SSD available.

Ahhh, the tyranny of having so many choices...

Will you be tethering in the field? I can easily hold my Macbook in one hand while making adjustments to the camera with the other, which for me at least wouldn't be feasible with the 13" Macbook Pro. I just tried this with my wife's MBP - it's as dense as a brick and that extra pound makes a big difference. If you won't be shooting tethered, in terms of processing speed and functionality the MBP is the better solution *if* you're willing to pay more and schlep the extra weight. So, it seems that the decision hinges on how you weigh the factors before and after the "if."

FWIW, on my last photo trip I brought both my Macbook (used mainly for tethering and not much else) and 15" MBP (for post-processing and work-related tasks when back in the hotel room). The added weight was a pain but I figured that's what rolling carry-on bags were designed for.  :P

John
Logged

vjbelle

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 406

It is a shame that you're not more flexible regarding a Windows based computer but I will respect your choices.  The weight of the Macbook is so appealing that I encourage you to stay with that decision.  The screen is easily color calibrated and the new processor should be able to handle a 50MP file.  That's a pretty big file for out in the field and easily obtained from C1.  I can't imagine tethering - but that's just me.  Way too much stuff and I've never found it better for focus accuracy than my loupe.  I've never needed more than 100gb for image processing but again that's just me.  Flash thumb drives are relatively cheap, fast and large enough to be used stand alone if needed.  I always back up everything to one when I'm traveling.  I found the keyboard on the Macbook difficult to use and I'm not alone but with practice it becomes more usable. 

Good luck......

Victor
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up