Time for a new machine... having trouble with Apple offerings

[mjm6]

Folks,

I'm at that place where I need to consider a new machine for my digital files.

My current machine is a Mac Pro from early 2008, and it is working great, but it is getting long in the tooth, and my files are not getting any smaller. I now have 36MP files coming in, and the machine is limited in a few ways.

1. This is the last of the machines that Apple no longer supports with OS updates.
2. It is a bit slow, but not terrible. I am not doing large-scale file processing (I don't shoot weddings).
3. I have it maxed with RAM, and have added new HD's to it at times, so it is a bit of a hodge-podge of hardware. A have no room for more drives, so I would have to put in a card and an external HD box of some kind to expand it and maintain access performance.

SO... I started looking at Apple, and the new Mac Pro appears to me to be really geared towards large scale shooters or video production. It is not a machine that I consider viable for a serious shooter (but not a high volume shooter), simple because of the obscene cost to assemble an image editing system.

...Except that I am not sure that any other model is terribly viable for serious image editing... so I have a few questions.

---What about dual monitors on the laptops? I don't mean using a single monitor extension and the laptop monitor, I mean two separate extension monitors, and not use the laptop monitor? How can this be done? Can I get different profiles working in the configuration as well?

---I presume an external keyboard should be no issues? I detest the small keyboards on laptops, even tough the Apple ones are as good as they get otherwise.

---I presume that the Thunderbolt interface will permit a large, fast HD box to be connected? Need that for all the image files.

---What else do I need to be thinking about if I try to use a laptop and my primary image editing machine? I will be using LR and PS almost exclusively.

---Are either the iMac or the Mac Mini viable alternatives? I suspect profiling will be a problem with these. That is a deal-breaker for me.


Thanks,


---Michael

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

If you don't need a computer that is portable, I will strongly recommend a Mini or an iMac. The Mini has the advantage of an FW port should you need it, but it doesn't have a dedicated graphics card and when you add the price of a quality monitor, keyboard and mouse, the savings vs. an iMac isn't that dramatic. The fastest iMac is as far as I remember much faster than a Mini.

Two monitors shouldn't be a problem with any new Mac, but one would have to be connected via a Thunderbolt port (and an adapter if it isn't a Thunderbolt monitor) since there's only one HDMI port.

I have so far used a Mini at home and a MacBook Air everywhere else, but have decided to go for a MacBook Pro Retina to replace both. To secure the investment for the future (and since my employer picks up the bill ), I went all the way and ordered the top model with a dedicated graphics card, 1 TB SSD and the fastest processor. It should arrive here within a couple of weeks (special order). According to those who have tried this configuration, it's sufficiently fast for editing 4K video, so photo files of more or less any size shouldn't be much of a challenge.

 

[mjm6]

Thanks Jorgen...

I'm going to look over the specs of the iMac and Mini and see what they can do for me.

These new form factor computers really aren't in line with the way I've worked in the past, but if they are up to the task, I'm willing to consider them.

I have two high quality NEC monitors that I'd prefer to continue using, so for the monitors, I'm all set unless I decide to splurge.

I guess one of the big questions is whether I need a laptop or not. My opinion is that I do not. I have a Nexto device that I can pull all of my images to in the field, and at this point I've never com close to maxxing that out. I bring a iPad for general web browsing and email while travelling.

That may put me in the Mini realm pretty solidly.


---Michael

 

[bradhusick]

The iMac is wicked fast (in some cases faster than the Mac Pro) and can run 2 monitors (one internal).

 

[mjm6]

Brad,

Can you profile both monitors? I thought I had read that there was a problem doing that...


---Michael

 

[Charles Wood]

I had a similar issue with my 2010 Mac Pro. Other than memory upgrades, getting to the internals of an iMac is PITA, regardless of performance capability. I agree with other postings regarding the new Mac Pro -- too expensive and geared towards serious commercial video work.

My solution:
OWC Mercury Accelsior_E2 PCI Express SSD
This replaced my boot drive using PCI slot and freed up a HD slot which now houses an SSD. The Accelsior also provides two additional eSata ports for additional HD expansion.

An additional option, although officially not supporting MacPros older than 2010 is the following. It works with older machines with newer OS installed and some driver tweaks.

Sapphire 100352MAC HD 7950 3GB GDDR5 Mac Edition... in stock at OWC

There are a number of options for bringing older MacPros closer to current state of the art. Personally, I would much prefer to keep my MacPros than go to an iMac, using the same cash expenditure to upgrade the MacPro and buy a new monitor that offers superior performance to that of the iMac.

 

[mjm6]

Charles,

Thanks for the info.

My machine is the last of the 32-bit architecture, so it is now unsupported in the OS development anymore, and won't be able to take anything like that.

One thought I had was to find a reasonably prices 2010 or newer Mac Pro to purchase and then get it loaded with memory, etc.

The other thought I have it to abandon Apple and go to a PC for my computing needs.

Right now, I'm leaning towards abandoning Apple frankly. The high cost of the Apple products is indefensible compared to the equal or better performance from PCs these days.


---Michael

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

There are btw. several new Thunderbolt hub devices appearing on the market now. I will certainly buy one or two of these for my new MBP:

CalDigit Thunderbolt? station
Sonnet - Echo 15 Thunderbolt Dock
Thunderbolt

Only having to connect one cable for all accessories makes life so much simpler

 

[fotophil]

Yes the 2013 Mac Pros can be very expensive. You might consider doing as I did and purchase a refurbished 2012 Mac Pro directly from Apple. They can be purchased with the same Apple Care Coverage that is offered with new computers so there is no risk as there is with a used computer purchase. The 2012 machines can run OS 10.9.

 

[fotografz]

I'm at the same place as you are Michael. I'm okay with my Mac Pro 2.1, 2X3 Ghz Quad-Core with only 10 gig of RAM running OS-X 10.7.5 and use two 30" Mac Cinema Screens (which I never could calibrate exactly the same) … I also upgraded the graphics card to an ATI Radeon HD 5770 … but it is all getting long in the tooth, and some applications are running a bit slow with these huge files these days (I work on 1,000 images at a crack when doing weddings).

Plus, I'm now doing a second photo/computer location in Florida, and it is there that I want any new set-up.

I'm looking at the iMac and spec'ed out one that will be around $3K after my pro business discount. 3.5 GHz Quad Core with turbo boost to 3.8 GHz, 3TB Fusion Drive, beefed up Graphics Card. I figure I can add a second better monitor since I only use the second screen for library collections and moving things around while processing an image on a main screen. Getting rid of the box allows me to put it on a rolling stand to make tethered work easier and more convenient.

I also priced a MacBook Pro and it was more expensive, and not as fast or as powerful even maxed out.

- Marc

 

[mjm6]

Marc,

Thanks for the comments...

I am hung up on the iMacs for some reason. Maybe they would be OK< but the all-in-one approach makes me a little itchy. At least with a Mac Mini, you get to choose the monitor, but then you concede on the video card and chipset options.

I have priced out some pretty good Photoshop machined in the PC realm, and they clearly come in cheaper than the Macs. Even if buying used, or refurbished, as photophill suggested (which I am completely comfortable with doing, at least for the refurbished ones).

Here is a link to some info on building a Photoshop PC:

Building a Photoshop CS6 Computer 2014 | NYC Graphic Designer Roberto Blake

I don't know the guy, but in general the recommendations look sound to me (I used to build all my machines before getting this most recent Mac Pro, so I am comfortable taking this approach).

Comes in around $1500... Hard to get newer than a 2010 version of a Mac Pro at that price.

Still struggling with this. Luckily, my current machine is still fully functional, so there is no imminent need to decide.


---Michael

 

[bradhusick]

Yes, you can profile both displays.

 

[fotografz]

Marc,

Thanks for the comments...

I am hung up on the iMacs for some reason. Maybe they would be OK< but the all-in-one approach makes me a little itchy. At least with a Mac Mini, you get to choose the monitor, but then you concede on the video card and chipset options.

I have priced out some pretty good Photoshop machined in the PC realm, and they clearly come in cheaper than the Macs. Even if buying used, or refurbished, as photophill suggested (which I am completely comfortable with doing, at least for the refurbished ones).

Here is a link to some info on building a Photoshop PC:

Building a Photoshop CS6 Computer 2014 | NYC Graphic Designer Roberto Blake

I don't know the guy, but in general the recommendations look sound to me (I used to build all my machines before getting this most recent Mac Pro, so I am comfortable taking this approach).

Comes in around $1500... Hard to get newer than a 2010 version of a Mac Pro at that price.

Still struggling with this. Luckily, my current machine is still fully functional, so there is no imminent need to decide.


---Michael

I hear you. That a Graphic Designer is talking PC is telling. Most commercial places are Mac equipped.

I'm to set in my ways (to Old?), to learn a different operating system.

I don't need the second computer until November, so we'll see what's what then. One thing seems clear, the new Mac Pro is too expensive for me these days.

- Marc

 

[Godfrey]

My image processing system is a Mac mini (late 2012 version) with i7 Quad-Core 2.6Ghz cpu, 16G RAM, 960G SSD (aftermarket installation). I use a 27" Thunderbolt Display with it, and have occasionally attached another 27" display as well. My image libraries are on external FW800 drives; at some point I'll move them to either USB3 or TB, but no need for now. The system is fast and responsive with 5, 12, 16, 18, and 24 Mpixel raw files from digital capture, as well as the FAR larger 4000ppi scans from 6x6 film.

The big internal SSD made a huge difference. I keep it such that it has approximately 50% free space. System boot up, Lightroom startup, PSCS startup are now just a few seconds.

I like having the mini vs an iMac ... I can upgrade the cpu unit to a new mini, a laptop, or a Mac Pro just by swapping the cables easily, without re-buying another display, keyboard, etc. The performance is just fine for my photography, and the cost was reasonable.

G

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

If I didn't work at 3 different locations plus when I travel, I would probably continue using a Mini or two. For photo work, it's powerful enough, it's very cheap and as Godfrey points out, it can be replaced by just disconnecting the little box and connect another one. Even with a new, powerful MBP, I'll keep a mini as file and possibly print server. One of the great things with Apple computers is how easily they connect with each other.

As for cheaper PC alternatives, I have worked with both for 20 years and Mac has one great advantage, at least after OS X took over and the "bombs" disappeared: They simply work. I'm frequently asked to help friends with their PC problems, a question that hardly ever arises from my Mac friends, except those who changed from PC very recently.

 

[mjm6]

Jorgen,

Hahaha, yes, you are right about the darn things just working... That has been a pleasure these past 6 years or so. No problems to report whatsoever, other than some basic configuration issue (Apple really screwed up when they took the color profiling back under the hood, and I'm not positive that Adobe has yet to get it all straightened out. This caused a lot of trouble for photographers who needed an unprofiled printing process for certain specific printing needs, of which I am one).

I have an engineering degree, and I worked on PCs from the beginning. I got the Mac Pro because it could do things that the PCs of the time were struggling to do, if I recall correctly (16G of ram is the one feature that I can recall). I simply don't think those differences exist anymore, and if anything, the PCs are probably better in some ways (certainly in the cost factor).

So there we have it... I'm going to look into the Mini and also the iMac a bit more, but I suspect I will be jumping back to the PC platform for my next machine.


---Michael

 

[jonoslack]

FWIW, I use a maxed out 15" retina MBP with thunderbolt displays. It's not the cheapest solution, but it works for me, and I always have my main man with me

 

[emr]

My late 2009 Mac Mini with 4 GB is getting pretty slow with ost processing and I'm also wondering if I should buy something new or upgrade it with 8 GB and an SSD. But considering the different Apple models, I feel they're not selling what I'd need. The Minis are made with the focus on being small and not necessary powerful. The iMacs on the other hand come with integrated displays, while I'd prefer to use an external one as I always have. Don't know how good the iMac displays are for post processing and accurate colour profiles. And then we have the Mac Pros which are over the top for me both specs and money wise. What I'd prefer is a separate Mac without an integrated display and located in the huge hole between a Mini and a Pro.

 

[mjm6]

emr,

You are feeling my pain... welcome to the club.

Sadly, I get the feeling that Apple is moving away from computers and towards gadgets. One look at their revenue stream by product, and you can see why this is possibly the case. The Mac products are increasingly becoming dwarfed by iPhone and iPad sales. Considering what it must take to continue developing the computers, that is a tough thing to maintain.

Plus, the MacBook sales are probably a high percentage of the total Mac sales. Might make sense for them to just do the MBs and leave the rest of the market to other people.

I have seen rumors that they are going to pull the Mini off the market as well. That probably won't happen, but it has been 2+ years since an update to those, which is probably fueling the rumors somewhat.

I really like the Mac Pro I have, and am not sure I want to part with Apple in my workflow. Heck, if I hated it, then I'd have an easy decision!


---Michael

 

[bradhusick]

If you can tolerate Windoze and the associated viruses and spyware then by all means go cheaper.

No thank you. How much is your time worth?