Computer question for Medium Format photography only

[Kolor-Pikker]

The 5K screen is just awesome, looked at some of my images on the 5K mac last weekend. My old 100ppi screen looks very blocky now. I want 200ppi.

I experienced the 5K iMac display at a friends place after I bought my 645Z and while first impressions were good, looking at my photos again at home on my 1440p display, I was actually disappointed at the fact that higher PPI at 5K made pixel-peeping harder and made the images appear sharper than they were!

I guess that problem can be fixed just by remembering to zoom into 200% when you want the equivalent magnification as on a 1440p display. God forbid I stop counting pixels and start concentrating on the aesthetics instead

 

[tcdeveau]

I'm a little late to the party here, but another thing that is nice about the 2013 Mac Pros compared to the iMacs is that if you opt for a Mac Pro, you can also upgrade the processor to a degree in the future.

I have a Mac Pro (6core/64gb RAM/1tb/D700) that I'm relatively happy with. I'm currently using it with a 27" apple thunderbolt display, 27" NEC PA272, and Wacom Cintiq 13hd. I went with a Mac Pro over the iMac because I like the idea of the displays and computer being separate. It also is more expandable/upgradeable than the iMac (although not as much as some PC setups). The D700s came in handy this summer when I decided to rip and transcode my whole blu ray/dvd collection, so you might want to ask if you'll only use computer for photography or for other things too. I also use my mac pro to record music with Logic Pro and as a Plex media server, and it streams blu ray rips nicely too. Now if only Apple would release that 5k display as a standalone display....

Regarding storage, I think a lot about RAID has been answered earlier. Personally I work off a RAID 5 Promise Pegasus 2 (R4) that I clone weekly (I don't take many pics) to a separate RAID 1+0 array. With the RAID 1+0 array, I ordered the 4 identical drives from different vendors to try and get drives from different lots to try and minimize the chance that multiple drives would fail at the same time. I also clone the Pegasus monthly to a giant 6tb enterprise drive that I keep in a pelican case offsite. I was in a house fire once. I was lucky and didn't lose any data (or you know other more important things...), but that made me realize you can never be too redundant and can never ever have too many backups. I use Carbon Copy Cloner and do clones with checksums (in the newest version the name for that is safety net or something?). The only thing I think I would add to my current setup regarding data would be a RAID 0 with SSDs as a scratch drive.

Both the 5k iMac and 6-core Mac Pro would be able to handle your large photoshop files just fine though imho. Hell even my 2012 Macbook Pro (2.7ghz i7/16gb RAM/750 sata SSD/Nvidia GT 650M) handles 1-2 gb TIFF stitches in Photoshop pretty well, so either of those would be a step up from your 2009 MBP. Good luck with your decision and happy computing!
Todd

 

[Wayne Fox]

I use Carbon Copy Cloner and do clones with checksums (in the newest version the name for that is safety net or something?).
Todd

The safetynet means CCC will move any changed file to an archive folder and keep it until a specified condition is met, and then write a new copy of that file to the cloned drive. This also means any file you delete from the original gets moved to the archive and kept until the condition has been met ... which has saved me on more than one occasion when I want to revert an image back to a previous version. Not as slick as time machine, but helpful.

You can set the program to keep the file based on available space, or a length of time. If set based on available space it’s pretty important to enable CCC to do a deletion run first (which means it takes a little more time), it will calculate how much space it needs and if there isn’t enough room will purge files from the safteynet based on oldest files first. I’ve set mine up to keep the files for 14 days.

The newest version of Carbon Copy Cloner may use checksum by default, at least I can’t find a setting for it anywhere.

I went with a Mac Pro over the iMac because I like the idea of the displays and computer being separate. It also is more expandable/upgradeable than the iMac (although not as much as some PC setups).

I also like my displays separate (I use 2 matching 30” NEC displays). I know the Mac Pro has been criticized because it isn’t as expandable as a PC ... I think that’s false. Thunderbolt 2 is basically the PCIe bus multiplexed with the display port data. This means an external PCI cabinet or any external devices operate just as well as if they were internal to the machine. Anything you can plug into a PC can also be used on the new Mac Pro. Yes you may have to buy a cabinet to use a card, but 95% of those that use a mac pro never add a card to it, and what the new Mac Pro does is get rid of all that space and create in incredibly efficient cooling system so the computer can be tiny and extremely quiet.

My drive cabinets are sitting 10 feet a way so I can’t really even hear the drives spin up or fans. And if I wanted to I could buy a 33 foot optical TB cable and move them into the next room. (and I may do that some day).

 

[Kolor-Pikker]

I'm a little late to the party here, but another thing that is nice about the 2013 Mac Pros compared to the iMacs is that if you opt for a Mac Pro, you can also upgrade the processor to a degree in the future.

You can upgrade the RAM and flash drive, but everything else is soldered to the board... and even it weren't, the only upgrade to the V2 Xeon series are the new V3 versions, which use a different socket with a different number of pins.

I really do wonder when Apple will finally announce a 2015 Mac Pro - the new processors are here, new V-NAND SSDs are here along with the NVME protocol, the USA factory is finally running up to speed, and there are many improvements with which Apple can still wow people with; imagine a "double-height" Mac Pro with dual processors, an extra bank of RAM sockets for up to 128GB or 64GB of cheaper RAM sticks, and support for two SSDs.

Also, I would suggest they drop AMD cards in favor of Nvidia Maxwell cards, which are just as fast, but generate considerably less heat and use less power than anything else. With two cards in a system this isn't an insignificant consideration (up to 300w difference), and could easily open up enough of a power budget to use faster/more components elsewhere.

One can order up a PC that has all of the above today, and perhaps even make it a Hackintosh, making the only difference a pretty exterior and six native thunderbolt ports, although you can buy an add-in card for that as well, so Apple really have to step up their game. Building a closed workstation system is a pretty risky proposition as-is, considering that just about every other company (Dell, HP, Lenovo) only talk about how expandable their systems are. Lenovo in particular has developed an interesting mezzanine connector for the P series that lets you add multiple special adapters internally to their workstations that don't take up any PCI-E slots, yet offer the ability to add m.2 SSDs, RAID controllers and other things, for as many as you need (depending on base model). Also I believe it's one of the most gorgeous PCs ever designed, but that's just my opinion:

 

[torger]

Concerning storage, I think having an off-site backup is crucial to cover the cases of fire or theft. I have mirrored disks on the local workstation, and then a local backup disk, and then an off-site data centre backup service, which in itself is backed up there. With 100 megabit internet connection and only about 60 gig of data per year, which I think is quite small (as an enthusiast tech cam shooter I don't make that many pictures a year) makes the backup service feasible. If it wouldn't be feasible I'd have external disks stored in some off-site location in a safe and make periodic backups there.

I'm too a PC user, you get better hardware that can live longer at lower prices, but it requires more computer knowledge and more messing around, so I think Mac is the best choice if you want something that "just works". Actually I run Linux most of the time, and run Windows in a virtual machine to access windows only software. Unfortunately Apple doesn't allow virtual machine other than on Apple hosts. My profession is within software development so I have a Mac too for that reason but it's not my main workstation when it comes to photography.

 

[tcdeveau]

I don't think the processor is soldered to the board. There's a video on Youtube from OWC on upgrading the processor that doesn't say a soldering iron is necessary. Thermal paste is however. OWC will also perform the upgrade service for you:

OWC Processor Upgrade Program options for Apple Mac Pro 2013

The only reason processor upgrades peaked my interest because there are a couple v2 8-core options with clock speeds faster than that you can get from Apple directly. However, whether it's worth ~$2300 and shipping my computer to OWC to move from a 6-core 3.5 ghz to an 8-core 3.3 ghz (Apple only offers a 3.0 ghz 8-core) I'm not so sure...but the option is there.

 

[Kolor-Pikker]

I don't think the processor is soldered to the board. There's a video on Youtube from OWC on upgrading the processor that doesn't say a soldering iron is necessary. Thermal paste is however. OWC will also perform the upgrade service for you:

The only reason processor upgrades peaked my interest because there are a couple v2 8-core options with clock speeds faster than that you can get from Apple directly. However, whether it's worth ~$2300 and shipping my computer to OWC to move from a 6-core 3.5 ghz to an 8-core 3.3 ghz (Apple only offers a 3.0 ghz 8-core) I'm not so sure...but the option is there.

Ok, that's interesting... the 2667 v2 is a very nice CPU, since it has a high turbo clock, I believe it goes up to around ~4GHz when utilizing 4 cores or less, which is the highest among Xeon processors (aside from the 2687w V2 which has a higher base clock but runs hotter).
Considering the E5 2667 V2 used to cost around $2200 new, their price isn't too out of line, with the rebate they basically charge a $100 service fee, but I'm sure you can find many used ones now for less, since a lot of IT companies will be moving to V3 chips now that they're out.

That said - $2300 is enough to build you a complete PC based on the 8-core 5960x which you can turbo up to 4.5GHz, here's a quick system I configured as an example - http://pcpartpicker.com/p/ybj7dC

 

[Wayne Fox]

However, whether it's worth ~$2300 and shipping my computer to OWC to move from a 6-core 3.5 ghz to an 8-core 3.3 ghz (Apple only offers a 3.0 ghz 8-core) I'm not so sure...but the option is there.

If you’ve ever monitored the CPU/core usages while using Lightroom or Photoshop, they don’t really take advantage of all the cores. Often you see none of the virtual cores getting hit at all. C1 on the other hand is pretty efficient at using all the cores and I’ve C1 max out all cores including virtual ones frequently when doing certain tasks.

So I guess if you spend most of your time in C1, a slightly slower clock speed but 2 more cores might be beneficial, (although it seems the cost/benefit ratio probably isn’t there as you mentioned).

If on the other hand if you spend most of your time in LR/PS, the faster CPU speed is probably the better option. the new 5k iMac wins many tests in Photoshop against the Mac Pro simply because it’s running at 4ghz.

 

[mmbma]

cores would matter in an intensiive operation like multi imaging stitching, HDR rendering, or 3d rendering. Your regular C1 editing on a small image file will not utlize all the cores at 100%. But if you shoot medium format and do stithcing, then the speed diference is huge.

 

[satybhat]

I agree.
Although when it comes to C1, do most folks here do the catalog on the SSD, with masters and output files on the RAIDs ?
As in, whether using sessions or catalogs, does it degrade performance if you reference the files (my new preferred method to be adopted ) vs having the catalog ingest the files ?

 

[fotografz]

If you’ve ever monitored the CPU/core usages while using Lightroom or Photoshop, they don’t really take advantage of all the cores. Often you see none of the virtual cores getting hit at all. C1 on the other hand is pretty efficient at using all the cores and I’ve C1 max out all cores including virtual ones frequently when doing certain tasks.

So I guess if you spend most of your time in C1, a slightly slower clock speed but 2 more cores might be beneficial, (although it seems the cost/benefit ratio probably isn’t there as you mentioned).

If on the other hand if you spend most of your time in LR/PS, the faster CPU speed is probably the better option. the new 5k iMac wins many tests in Photoshop against the Mac Pro simply because it’s running at 4ghz.

I recently set up a second studio using a maxed out 5K iMac. I mostly use LR and PS and can confirm it's quick ... rarely see the spinning wheel ... but I don't do many 4 gig stitches ... mostly layered files up to 1 to 2 gig max and even that is relatively rare enough that I wouldn't spec out a computer just for that.

BTW, the 5K screen is spectacular!

- Marc

 

[Wayne Fox]

I agree.
Although when it comes to C1, do most folks here do the catalog on the SSD, with masters and output files on the RAIDs ?
As in, whether using sessions or catalogs, does it degrade performance if you reference the files (my new preferred method to be adopted ) vs having the catalog ingest the files ?

I don’t use C1 to catalog, but prefer Lightroom for that. Once i’ve determined which files I want to use in LR, I have a generic C1 session, and just use the System Folders section of the Library tab to navigate to the folder where they images reside, do my raw conversions and output tiff files, then back to LR and import those tiff files.
At home I have the catalog and image files on a thunderbolt 2 4 drive raid 0 which measure at about 600 MB/sec. While the internal SSD is faster (more like 900-1000MB/sec), I did some tests comparing between the two and really didn’t see any difference in actual real world performance. I also have a small part of my internal SSD setup as my primary photoshop scratch disk, not sure how valuable that is with 64GB of ram.

I do have a Mac Book Pro when I’m at my store or traveling and partitioned the 1GB SSD into 2 pieces, 600GB’s are dedicate to Catalog and images, the rest system drive applications. While the drive is faster than the raid at home, the CPU and ram limitations make it noticeably slower. Sort of relative though because it’s faster than my tricked out 2010 Mac Pro with PCI SSD startup disk and 4 drive internal raid 0. It’s still pretty fast.

 

[satybhat]

Wayne,
You have some fantastic info on the set up of your MacPro on your website. Really helpful. So I have pulled the trigger on the MacPro, 8core ( I did this hoping the next iterations of softwares would be core-sensitive, considering the hardware is headed towards more and more cores) 64GB, 1TB SSD. Also have a 5big 20TB (which I will soft-raid (raid0) to 10TB and might mirror it to the other half weekly or monthly, since when I shoot, I shoot worth approx 64GB or so, but not that frequently). 2nd off site drive of 6TB, mirrored again. You mention use-degradation of the internal SSD. Is it that common though ?

 

[Wayne Fox]

Wayne,
Also have a 5big 20TB (which I will soft-raid (raid0) to 10TB and might mirror it to the other half weekly or monthly

Not to be critical, but I”m not sure where this mirroring would accomplish anything, other than the retrieval of an older version of the file. If you run soft raid 0’s but both raids are built on partitions of the same 5 drives, the second raid offers no real redundancy since if you lose a drive, you lose both raids. My clones are all to other drive cabinets. Your offsite clone is certainly important, but again I don’t see anything gained by mirroring 5 stripes onto 5 stripes on the same 5 drives.

You mention use-degradation of the internal SSD. Is it that common though ?

Good question. SSD degradation does happen, but TRIM reduces it dramatically and Apples own drives have TRIM enabled. So I’m probably worrying about nothing. I guess my logic was if part of the SSD is constantly hammered because it’s a photoshop scratch disk and in fact it did degrade to the point of being unreliable, maybe that would leave the remainder of the drive functioning well. Since an SSD isn’t a spinning platter, I’m probably not gaining anything.

In your case, since you internal SSD is 1TB however, you may want to consider another option which is what i do with 1TB SSD on my powerbook. There I have partitioned the internal drive into 400/600 TB segments, the 400 TB is the operating system/applications/user folder and the 600TB is my LR catalog/current image files. You could then clone those two segments over to a dedicated folder on your external raid, and the rest of the image files of your LR library could also be on the external raid.

 

[Jeffery Salter]

Wayne,

Thanks for sharing your computer and workflow. I recently updated to a new Mac Pro with 512ssd, 3.0GHz 8-Core and Dual AMD FirePro D700-6GB VRAM. As expected it's working out perfect with C1 (v8.1) and photoshop CC.

However what's been keeping me on the phone are my external enclosures. I have always used 5 bay or 8 bay Sonnett digital enclosures w/ esata. I even purchased the Sonnett Echo Express SE II (thunderbolt to esata module) and installed a Pcie card for my esata enclosures. Its working well, but I keep thinking that I'm not taking advantage of the newer thunderbolt technology.

Could you or any forum member recommend an multiple bay thunderbolt enclosure? I have purchased the OWC ThunderBay 4 TB2. I'm interested in options which are a bit more robust.

Thank you,
Jeffery

 

[RVB]

Wayne,

Thanks for sharing your computer and workflow. I recently updated to a new Mac Pro with 512ssd, 3.0GHz 8-Core and Dual AMD FirePro D700-6GB VRAM. As expected it's working out perfect with C1 (v8.1) and photoshop CC.

However what's been keeping me on the phone are my external enclosures. I have always used 5 bay or 8 bay Sonnett digital enclosures w/ esata. I even purchased the Sonnett Echo Express SE II (thunderbolt to esata module) and installed a Pcie card for my esata enclosures. Its working well, but I keep thinking that I'm not taking advantage of the newer thunderbolt technology.

Could you or any forum member recommend an multiple bay thunderbolt enclosure? I have purchased the OWC ThunderBay 4 TB2. I'm interested in options which are a bit more robust.

Thank you,
Jeffery

Jeff,the Caldigit and G-technology drives are top quality,I'm using a pegasus now and its very fast but I like Caldigit and Gtech for reliability.

CalDigit T4

G-SPEED Studio XL | G-Technology

Rob

 

[tcdeveau]

I have 2 Promise Pegasus R4 units (a TB1 and TB2) and I like them. No issues here and they work as advertised. They can take quite awhile to initialize at first. I've been using the TB1 enclosure for about 2 years and the TB2 version for about a month (both are in the default RAID 5). I do wish they had another interface in addition to thunderbolt in the event I ever have to use it on a computer that lacks thunderbolt. Had to contact Promise support recently and they called me back within the hour I submitted a support request and worked out my issue, and I found that level of customer support impressive FWIW.

I also have an OWC Mercury Elite Pro Dual (in RAID 1). Worked flawlessly for a little bit but then I started getting I/O and Data Underrun errors. At the same time, computer started having kernel panics and going through freeze/restart loops, and I traced that issue to the drive bay. Contacted OWC customer service who were pretty helpful. Said the SATA cable in the enclosure was most likely the culprit because mine was from a batch that shipped from the supplier with a cable not ok'd by OWC, and they sent me a new cable free of charge etc. Haven't gotten it back up and running yet but I think that should probably fix it (both drives check out - 2 matching western digital RE 3-tb drives). However, that enclosure is only 2 bays which is pretty limiting imho. It has a USB 3.0 and thunderbolt interface which is nice.

Last, I have a USB 3.0/eSATA 4-bay Sans Digital enclosure that I'm running in RAID 1+0 with some Sonnet eSATA/Thunderbolt adaptors and it hasn't given me any trouble (in ~two years). I'm only using that for backups and it gets about 1/3 the read/write speeds of the Pegasus units. Not sure I'd recommend that solution because the eSATA thunderbolt adaptors that I have are annoying to use.
Todd

 

[Jeffery Salter]

Jeff,the Caldigit and G-technology drives are top quality,I'm using a pegasus now and its very fast but I like Caldigit and Gtech for reliability.

Thanks Rob. The G-Tech studio xl 8-bay looks very promising. I took a look at its downloadable pdf manual and liked what I saw.

I have 2 Promise Pegasus R4 units (a TB1 and TB2) and I like them. No issues here and they work as advertised. They can take quite awhile to initialize at first. I've been using the TB1 enclosure for about 2 years and the TB2 version for about a month (both are in the default RAID 5).

I also have an OWC Mercury Elite Pro Dual (in RAID 1). Worked flawlessly for a little bit but then I started getting I/O and Data Underrun errors.

Last, I have a USB 3.0/eSATA 4-bay Sans Digital enclosure that I'm running in RAID 1+0 with some Sonnet eSATA/Thunderbolt adaptors and it hasn't given me any trouble (in ~two years).

Thanks Todd. Your feedback on it is very helpful. I have been following the many different reviews on the Pegasus enclosures and opinions seem to be very varied. I do have a question for you. Do you keep your Pegasus running on all the time? (I shortened your post a bit in the requote. Hope you don't mind.)


Jeffery

 

[Don Libby]

Jeffery, all my studio external drives are G-Tech and have been more than pleased with them. I've even done video off them with no problems.

Don

 

[Jeffery Salter]

Good morning Don. If you don't mind could you please tell me which G-tech drives you have and if you leave them running 24/7?

thanks,
Jeffery