Storage for digital photography

Hello,
I'm just about to upgrade my G5 to a Mac Pro. I'm trying to figure out what the best storage / performance strategy would be. I'm an amateur digital photographer, and I shoot with a 10 MP camera so my hard drives are filling up! I currently use a 74 GB Raptor as my boot drive/sandbox and a 400 GB WD as my OS & file storage drive. I love the speed of the Raptor.
But I already need more storage space, so when I move to the Mac Pro I'd like to do things differently. I've heard it's better when using Photoshop and Lightroom to keep photos 1) on an internal drive (not a problem with the Mac Pro's 4 drive bays) and 2) on a different drive than the OS install (is this true?) and 3) on a drive with lots of free space.
I was considering a WD Raptor 150 GB boot drive with OS X & Applications, and a pair of 400 GB drives in a RAID (? I know next to nothing about RAID) in the tower. Why? I already own 2 400 GB drives, so this would keep the costs down. I don't know much about the options here, so I would appreciate your input.

I saw a Barefeats review that said the Maxtor Maxline Pros were the fastest, but they've been acquired by Seagate?
The Maxtor MaXLine Pro 500GB drive is an excellent drive although coupled with the fact that it's no longer being manufactured and it does run hotter than other drives makes it for some not a good recommendation. I use the MaXLine III and they work fantastically well for me.
What makes, the MaXLines such effective boot drives, as well as Photoshop scratch drives, is their superb small read/write performance. Something which is surpassed with the 750GB/1TB drives.
Is this negated by the extra speed and capacity of a 2x 500 or 700 GB RAID 0?
Yes and no.
The idea behind scratch drives is that it replaces RAM when needed so the faster your scratch drives are and the less they're used by anything else the better. However, since CS2 and Mac OS X Tiger, Photoshop has been able to use the RAM and disk caching used by Mac OS X which allows it you better utilise any available RAM. Because of this, your boot drive needs to also be as fast as possible given Mac OS X is doing much of the caching.
This is the reason why I find that you'll find that a 2 x 750GB configuration with your 400GB drives as backup to be the most sensible option to go with. Sure they're more expensive than 500GB drive but the added speed of the perpendicular recording and higher density is well worth the extra $US150 or so you have to pay for these drives. C'mon man… $US150!!
This BareFeats report…
http://www.barefeats.com/hard91.html
… should help you come to that conclusion.

Similar Messages

Which monitors for digital photography?

What features should be considered when choosing a color monitor for handling and editing digital photographs? What considerations should be given to size, resolution and features? What are some brand names that are reasonably priced that have the important features.
I'll be using the monitor as a plug-in for my PowerBook G4 when I want to have a larger screen than 15".
Thank you.

Have you done any searching on the internet? A quick search resulted in these topic:
Saturday Shout: The Best Monitors for Digital Photography ...
Choosing a Computer Monitor, digital cameras, digital photography ...
Apple Displays for Digital Photography
All you have to to is search.
OT
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto (iPhoto.Library for iPhoto 5 and earlier versions) database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger or later), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. There are versions that are compatible with iPhoto 5, 6, 7 and 8 libraries and Tiger and Leopard. Just put the application in the Dock and click on it whenever you want to backup the dB file. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.
NOTE: The new rebuild option in iPhoto 09 (v. 8.0.2), Rebuild the iPhoto Library Database from automatic backup" makes this tip obsolete.

I MAC for digital photography

I am planning to buy an IMAC with 27" monitor. I will be doing digital photography but not CAD design or engineering calculations. What are the recommended specs as far as processor,speed,RAM,Hard drive size,video card, etc?

HI
All the Imac 27" are pretty fab for digital photography, they have better graphics cards than the previous iMac models. You'll need to buy as much memory as you can afford, 4Gb is standard but 8 or 12Gb will make apps like Lightroom faster to use. Monitor calibration on Lion is not straightfoward though, as many older x-rite profiling gadgets are not yet supported (software fix still being cooked up by x-rite). Best to store your image files on an external HD, like a Drobo. Don't use the iMac's HD to store your archive, just in case it fails.
Good luck
Tim

Nano as field storage for digital photogrpahy?

I'm interested in buying a digital camera and wonder if iPods -- and the Nano in particular -- can be used for downloading image files from digital cameras so you can keep shooting.
Is this easy? Practical? Do I need different cables, adapters, etc.?
Thanks,
Brad

I know you can get adapters that will allow you to copy images from digital media onto hard-drive based iPods. To my knowledge, none of these adapters is compatible with the Nano.
And honestly, the nano is a bit small for holding images.
Doc

O.T. Digital Photography Newsletter

In case you've never come across it, fotoespresso, a digital photography newsletter is worth a look.
To quote from the site:
fotoespresso reports news, trends, new techniques and tools for digital photography.
Our focus is on digital photography workflow: How to make the life of digital photographers easier.
Our audience are professional photographers and also ambitious amateurs. fotoespresso features real world experience reports.
fotoespresso will be published about 3-4 times per year
http://www.fotoespresso.com/fotoespresso.html

Hi Malcolm, I checked out the ebook for the D70 and it looks very good. I like the bit on Photoshop too. 'Course all this is still way over my head but I have long arms.
Do you know anydone on the forum who bought one.
marty landolt

Question about what to buy for Pro Digital Photography

I do quite a bit of digital photography with high-end digital backs, was wondering if there would be a significant difference in buying a Mac Pro versus the 2.8 extreme or the 2.4 Imac with an equivalent amount of ram, say 4 gigs. The cost would be greater off course going the Mac Pro route including monitor etc. and less portable. And the expandability issue, which really isn't a problem since I use quite a bit of external drives.
Currently I'm using a first generation intel Imac 20' been having a few connection issues with the camera, not quite sure if it's software or hardware but still get good results with this machine.
I have never used a Mac Pro for this application so not sure if there truly is a mind blowing difference.
I like the portability of the Imac and the quick set up. Also I've heard some rumors about the glossy screen being an issue.
Any comments would be appreciated.
Much Thanks.
.

I am also doing digital photography, and am in need of a new machine. My old MDD G4, just can't cut it, especially dealing with RAW images from my D300. If you are using digital backs, I would say that the extra horsepower of a Mac Pro would greatly speed your workflow. Not knowing your workflow, I would still say that the internal expandability would help make keeping images orderly a snap. Say one 4-500 gig drive for unedited raw image storage, another for final edited image storage, and a third or a partition as a swap space for photoshop (Raptor?). You could use an external firewire drive as a backup drive with time-machine. Just a suggestion.
As for a monitor, you get a Dell (I can't believe I said that) FPW2407 24" widescreen. They are just as good as the Apple Cinemas, but cost a lot less. With the cash you save, you can get a Spyder to calibrate it, if don't already have one.
I am waiting for my taxes to come back before I get one. I waited and waited and waited till I could not waits no more, and got a new Nikon body. I am looking at the 8-core 3.0 with the Nvidia 8800. I can get the ram from OWC.
As always, take everything I say with a salt-lick!
Mack

Imac for Pro Digital Photography....

I do quite a bit of digital photography with high-end digital backs, was wondering if there would be a significant difference in buying a Mac Pro versus the 2.8 extreme or the 2.4 Imac with an equivalent amount of ram, say 4 gigs. The cost would be greater off course going the Mac Pro route including monitor etc. and less portable. And the expandability issue, which really isn't a problem since I use quite a bit of external drives.
Currently I'm using a first generation intel Imac 20' been having a few connection issues with the camera, not quite sure if it's software or hardware but still get good results with this machine.
I have never used a Mac Pro for this application so not sure if there truly is a mind blowing difference.
I like the portability of the Imac and the quick set up. Also I've heard some rumors about the glossy screen being an issue.
Any comments would be appreciated.
Much Thanks.
.

Never buy a sweater without trying it on.
Visit an Apple Store or make a query at your local Mac users group. I know we have lots of pro & amateur photographers in our MUG (especially in the Ps & Ps Elements SIG) who are always showing each other stuff on their computers.
I have found that many people who do a LOT of digital photography are peculiar in that they like to rely on the evidence of their own eyes more than the opinions of others.
The glossy screen is NOT an issue any more than the glossy inside of the windshield of your car is an issue. It is entirely POSSIBLE to focus on your reflection in your windshield while driving instead of looking through it, but the results are not encouraging. Its a matter of perception, not vision. The human visual system (in more developed examples of the species) quickly sees through the glass instead of focusing on it.
M

Digital photography. will a mini do?

My father is into digital photography, about a year ago he bought a canon rebel XT and has been spending alot of money on it in that time. The one thing that he hasn't spent any money on is his computer, he is still using my old AMD Athlon thunderbird.
I recently switched over to the MAC with a 20 inch iMac and will never go back! this has made him think about doing the same, he asked me to look into what kind of mac he should get. my first reaction was that the mini wasn't powerfull enough for him. He has filled up his 120gb hard drive with pictures, countless cd's and has even started using my hard drive for extra storage. He plays around with them a bit in photoshop, gets some developed, he has been talking about starting a web page. He isn't doing anything extremely hardcore but things that need a little more power then the average user would need.
so is the mac mini up to the job? The iMac is quite alot more, but i don't want him to get something that wont give him the performance he needs.

In terms of processor speed, the mac mini packs plenty of power. Many will point out that Photoshop isn't Intel native which is true but it runs under Rosetta about as fast as it does on the G4 iMacs at work and no one is complaining that it is too slow. When Adobe ships the Universal version in 2007 we should see a big speed increase.
You'll want to upgrade the RAM - the stock 512MB won't be enough. You'll also want more hard drive space - I got a FireWire external drive for mine and boot with it. I use the internal drive just for music.

Can I use my APT as storage for my music and movies?

I m Using MacBook Air and APT 160
I have three questions:
1- Can I use my APT as storage for my music and movies I need the space in my MacBook Air? If yes please tell me how?
2-What is the best way to pair my APT with my MacBook Air through WiFi “g” or “n” or what is the latest, which will save me time?
3-What is the best external drive that might fit my need?
Thanks

Waleedan wrote:
I m Using MacBook Air and APT 160
I have three questions:
1- Can I use my APT as storage for my music and movies I need the space in my MacBook Air? If yes please tell me how?
No, it is not a storage solution as if you need to get the things off it you can't. If you deete things from iTunes they'll delete at the next sync. Provided you have backup copie on an external drive or CD/DVD, you could delete the actual file from the Finder leaving the database entry in iTunes - in this way you free space on the laptop but files stay on AppleTV.
An alternative would be to change itunes Preferences (Advanced tab) not to import into the library, then for things you don't want on the Macbook Air, have them on external drive, drag and drop to itunes, sync, then disconnect drive for portable use. Again when the files aren't available they won't be deleted, unless you delete the itunes database reference.
2-What is the best way to pair my APT with my MacBook Air through WiFi “g” or “n” or what is the latest, which will save me time?
n is faster.
3-What is the best external drive that might fit my need?
Your options are basically small portable drives most of which are USB powered (though may require powered hubs if you have a hub) or larger desktop externals requiring power adapter and more space.
For value the desktop externals give more capacity per pound/dollar, and will also have bigger capacity maximums at a given time (bigger and bigger capacity discs being developed all the time).
Try and work out the capacity/pro
ice point and if a portable might be useful, then you have a variety of option.
Peronally I like Western Digital, Seagate and Freecom models, but they're all fairly good these days, and even popular brands can fail. I avoid Maxtor and IBM/Hitachi having had failures in the past, but all drives eventually fail.
AC

What are some things i need to know before buying Aperture 3? because i know a little about digital photography

Help please

Your Mac seems to be compatible with Aperture (http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1657), but is your camera? Here is a list of cameras, that are supported by Aperture, see: Apple - Aperture - Technical Specifications - RAW Support
If your camera is not on the list, you can work in Aperture with jpegs, tiffs, psd images, but not with raw images.
because i know a little about digital photography
That is a bit ambigious - do you want to say that you have some experience with digital photography, or nearly none at all? Have you tried iPhoto and do you like it? iPhoto comes on every newer mac included for free, so you could give it a try. Aperture and iPhoto are related, they are both supporting a lossless workflow - you can always undo all edits and your original images are preserved, and both are compatible. Each application can open the photl library of the other app.
Only Aperture has advanced editing tools and more possibilites to organize and search your images.
To elaborate on Kirby's question: To help you decide, it would help to know, if you have used any software for organizing a photo library previously, and and what you are looking for. If not, give iPhoto a trial run - it should be on your Mac. If you see, that you need more advanced features than the basic set in iPhoto, check, if Aperture will give you those and then buy Aperture. You can continue right where you left off in iPhoto.
-- Léonie

Books on digital photography and iphoto

Hi,
Looking for a Christmas present for my dad - he's just got his first digital camera (at the age of 87...) and a new Macbook.
I'm looking for a good book that will take him through the basics of taking pictures, then having fun in iPhoto. But every one on digital photography I've found so far seems to assume you'll be using Photoshop, and all the ones on iPhoto assume you can already take photographs!
Anyone know of any books that do the basics of photography and iPhoto in one?

The best feature of digital photography is that you can shoot as much as you like and delete poorly composed images.
Get a tripod for the camera and your dad can just start shooting away (after reading the camera manual).
After twenty shots his "aim" will improve. After 50 shots he'll start thinking of composition prior to shooting. After 100 shots he'll start making adjustments to the camera settings (off automatic).
Get some rechargeable batteries and a charger so he can swap bad for good. I use a great "15 minute" version from Energizer.
As for iPhoto and the new computer:
Buy a book if you think it will help
Or connect the camera to the new Mac and watch iPhoto gather them in.
Once in iPhoto he can make additional edits (probably not needed) and make a slide show. He'll be telling all his friends to get a Mac and a camera.
I'm not suggesting your dad is too old to learn and a good book at Christmas is a treat. But I'll bet he would like a good novel over a complicated subject as digital photography.
Play, shoot, capture and create. Life's too short to read a manual.

Just what I wanted/needed for digital photos...

ever since digital photography became mainstream and i ditched the 35mm camera for a digital one, one of my main hangups has been how to share photos with others. in the old days (35mm), you just grabbed the folder of prints and showed them to whoever. however, with digital pitcures prior to the iphone, i either had to email them or i had to go to the store for prints. now i can cram pretty much all my pictures on the iphone and can show them off conveniently, since i take it everywhere. for me, this is fast becoming one of the coolest unexpected perks of the iphone!

Well, generally it's already pre-paid with your OS. But you can always check with
iTunes Store Support
http://www.apple.com/emea/support/itunes/contact.html
They can tell if you paid cash or if it was OS Redeemed.

"Reciprocity failure" in digital photography?

Slightly off topic but there's a lot of good knowledge here so I was hoping to take advantage of it.
Those of us who shot (or shoot) film are aware of reciprocity failure, as light levels get very low and exposure times increase the film doesn't behave as it does at 'normal' times and light levels.
Is there a digital photography equivalent? I ask because the other night we had a killer thunderstorm going on here, perfect for photography because the rain held off for a good hour. This was also the first time I've don this kind of shooting with the digital camera. So I grabbed the tripod and camera (canon 40d) and went outside. Set the camera to iso 200 aperture between ƒ/13 and ƒ/8 pointed to the sky and held the shutter open. Exposure times were anywhere from 15 secs to 90 secs and like I said the shots were good.
However once I got them into Aperture I noticed what to me seems like more noise then I'd expect (and have seen with normal shots) for an iso 200 setting. Not enough noise to be a show stopper but still.
So that brings me to my question, do long exposure times/low light levels cause an increase in noise? And if so is there anyway to counter it in the camera?
thanks

Right, knew it wasn't "reciprocity failure" (hence the quotes) but was looking for something equivalent: long exposures/low light changing the normal characteristics of the image gatherer (film or sensor).
I found the setting for the long exposure setting, I had it off. Next chance I get I'll get it a try. The only drawback (and its really fairly major especially for lightening shots) is the fact that the exposure time is doubled and the camera is out of service during the second 'exposure'. Can't really predict when that next strike will come and as they seem to come in clusters this would severely limit the number of exposures I could shoot.
It was dark the only illumination was coming from the lightening but I didn't think to test it out by trying one exposure with the lens cap on to compare. Will give that a shot next time.
Thanks for the info,
regards

What computer to use for digital workflow?

I have an old but faithful 2003 Powerbook G4 15" 1.25 GHz with 2GB ram. But as I grow in my digitial phography work I can see that I need to get a new computer. I have looked at the iMac but 2 BIG problems.
1) They only offer a glossy screen and every photo forum, blog etc by any professional or semi pro person, all say do not use a gloss screen but the matte version. The Apple store sales people3 pooh poohed that but I hate gloss screens anyway. Plus I have heard they are very difficult to calibrate.
2) The iMac (What I was primarily considering) seems to have severe issues. I was just on the discussion forum here and the stripes on the display and the logic board problems on 2 year old iMacs greatly concerns me. Apple quality seems to have slipped and their sales staff seems to do nothing but pooh pooh issues.
So for you using Aperture, what would you do? The MacPro is too expensive, the mini-Mac is not able to to the job (maybe) and the iMac quality scares me.

Just my 2¢ and a bit of professional experience.
First off - there is no issue in calibrating glossy displays.
Second - I have come to the conclusion along with a number of colleagues that it is a matter of personal preference rather than a purely technical evaluation as to the "best" surface treatment of a monitor that is suitable to evaluate images on-screen. I have also come to the conclusion that personal preference has a lot to do with what you may be used to using seeing.
Third - Making decisions based on internet or other hearsay and urban myth is not a great way to do things. I find 90+% of "facts" espoused regarding digital photography and photography in general are anecdotal at best and generally obsolete.
I am a color nut - always have been and I have made both good and bad purchasing decisions - most of the good ones have been based on what my eyes see and what I have learned through my own use and experience. The worst ones were based on research and what other anonymous people's general opinions were (mostly based on echoing others unsubstantiated bullcrap)
I happen to own a fairly wide array of gear and can tell you that after becoming used to a few of my glossy displays in a number of formats and sizes the matte surface coating actually bothers the crap out of me when critically evaluating images on screen for a number of reasons. I have a couple of monitors that have better color gamut than my Apple cinema 24" displays but actually use the new Cinema 24" displays most of the time at this point and do not end up making bad color decisions.
Last but not least what is your primary output medium for your photographs? The web - who cares what you use it will look different to almost everyone out there. Your TV? - Please give me a break. Walmart, Costco? - Again your monitor will be the least of your worries. Highest quality in-house or professional color managed printing with a RIP and custom profiles for every paper, ink set, viewing conditions, etc? Your experience in translating tones from additive to subtractive reflected light media are probably more important than your monitor.
Bottom line - buy the 24" imac and be very very happy. If you want a laptop buy the 15 or 17 macbook pro with a 24" cinema display external keyboard and mouse and be ecstatic.
RB

Motion for still Photography???

I want to ask you guys if any of you have used Motion for still photography, lets say portraits and more specifically with chromakeys..
the thing is I was looking for doing some stuff with a PS plugin called Primatte Chromakeyer, so I downloaded the demo and its way cool, but dont have the money to buy it right away...
so my thinking got started (it usually does not do anything) but this time I tried using motion on one of the psd samples the Primatte had in their site...
I opened a new motion project and sized it to the sample picture size and change the aspect ratio to square pixels, and then applied my DV Matte Blast from dvgarage.com and it worked out fine, then did the same image using the primatte RT from motion and looked a little better then just exported to a JPEG image and compared the files... they quite looked the same but the color was contrasty just a bit...
so what you experienced motion users think of these matter???
heres the sample image:
http://nogalesdefiesta.com/media/applediscuss/crhomatest.jpg

I made another test, these time I used only the DV Matte Blast on my image,
all other procedure is the same as the first post, so this time I changed the export settings to use the Photoshop setting, it gave me the cut out image with a black backgroung but no alpha, so I had to re-export the image but this time I move the settings so it would just give an alpha (it gave me a black and white image, a matte)...
now in photoshop I just added this matte to an alpha channel to the original image and it gave a good result....
here my latest shot at it:
/___sbsstatic___/migration-images/459/4593102-1.jpg
what I'm getting out of this???
if I just want to change a couple of images it will do the trick...
but still if a want to do more portait stuff, I guess will have to go with the Digital Anarchy Primatte Chromakeyer....
but it certainly works this way, but can't go over 2048x2048 pixels.

Storage for digital photography

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for