Computers for photo editing

[wolves_wanderer]

At the moment I am using a fairly high-spec PC (3.2 P4, 1 gig ram) for downloading my pictures, doing Photoshop work (typically adjusting levels, doing crops etc) and then burning CD's for the lab.

I have noticed that after about 6 months or so the PC really starts to slow down, even when the old pictures are archived off the machine. I defrag regularly but nothing really seems to help short of a full restore which is a bit of a faff frankly.

I deal with about 1500 pictures a month and I was wondering what sort of systems others use and whether going over to a Mac would improve matters at all?

[beano500]

3.4 P4 but 2Mb of RAM.

HD is partitioned so that OS is separate from other programs and separate again are the picture files. ("F: Drive" for "Fotos"!)

Toying with the idea of another 2Mb of RAM as the price has come down even since about January when the last lot was purchased.

But haven't noticed any serious slowing down, though have to tidy up the F: drive from time to time. All end up on DVD or separate HD.

Still on Steam-Powered-Version 6.0.1 of PS, though.

>> Edited by beano500 on Monday 24th October 15:01

[v6gto]

Grey box with "Dell" written on the front here I think mine has slowed down too, but that's probably to to my style of maintanance..."I'll do it later".

Martin.

[GetCarter]

Every computer I've ever owned has slowed down over time (*Macs too). Eventually they annoy me so much I just throw them out of the top floor window and buy another.

[simpo two]

No problems here - though I have two HDs as well, for system and data.

Maybe time to clean out spyware, temp files and other clutter?

[GetCarter]

simpo two said:

No problems here - though I have two HDs as well, for system and data. Maybe time to clean out spyware, temp files and other clutter?

Maybe it's just that I buy a new Mac and the PC seems slow, then buy a new PC and the Mac seems slow.

Currently my G5 2.7 Duel Mac is like a Caterham compared to the Morris Minor that is the 3.6 ghz PC

If you spend some time looking at System Info/Software environment - you'll see that all hell is in fact happening most of the time inside the tiny mind that is the CPU

I'm sure spending time 'housekeeping' would make a huge difference to performance - but I'm the sort of clod that will erase "NeverErase.exe"

[406]

simpo two said:

No problems here - though I have two HDs as well, for system and data. Maybe time to clean out spyware, temp files and other clutter?

I have 2x120 gig HDD's partitioned into 4 drives C: is for the system files, D:For Apps e: & F: for for data. I also have 1.5 gig ram and a 2.60 gigahertz Intel Pentium 4 with HTT, 8 kilobyte primary memory cache 512 kilobyte secondary memory cache

[v6gto]

406 said:

I have a bigger willie than you

Martin.

[ehasler]

I got fed up with waiting for my PC to chug through processing RAW files etc..., so built a twin Xeon box with 4GB RAM.

Photoshop can be very disk intensive, so I went for the following spec:

C drive - O/S and program files (2 x 74GB 10k rpm SATA drives RAID 0)
D drive - images and PS swap (2 x 74GB 10k rpm SATA drives RAID 0)
E drive - backup (250GB SATA), as if you lose 1 disk in a RAID 0 array, you lose everything

I also back everything up to an external 250GB drive.

In my experience, having 2 x CPUs of a certain speed is better than having 1 quicker one, and having a fast disk is important too. 2 x 10k SATA drives in RAID 0 will give you a big benefit, but bear in mind that you need to have regular backups.

Also consider having your PS swap file and image files on a different disk to the OS and application files, and also slam in as much RAM as you can.

[v6gto]

ehasler said:

And my willie is even bigger than his

Martin.

[simpo two]

ehasler said:

...twin Xeon box with 4GB RAM ... O/S and program files (2 x 74GB 10k rpm SATA drives RAID 0) images and PS swap (2 x 74GB 10k rpm SATA drives RAID 0) backup (250GB SATA)... external 250GB drive. 2 x CPUs 2 x 10k SATA drives in RAID 0...

Call that a computer? Why, I've got 8 nuclear-powered Cray supercomputers inter-connected by 10" diameter gold rods and cooled by liquid sodium....

[v6gto]

simpo two said:

Call me Errol Flyn

Martin.

PS:- please, no more, I can't take it. I'm crying laughing here.

[ehasler]

simpo two said:

Call that a computer? Why, I've got 8 nuclear-powered Cray supercomputers inter-connected by 10" diameter gold rods and cooled by liquid sodium....

Gold? GOLD? You don't want gold mate - that's so 80's!

12" platinum rods are what you really need

Seriously though, I barely get any time to spend on photography as it is, so I invested in a decent spec PC so that the time I do get isn't spent watching an hour glass.

RAM and quick HDDs are pretty cheap these days, and they make a huge difference to how quickly PS runs.

[406]

v6gto said:

406 said: I have a bigger willie than you . Martin.

Of course it's bigger, I am single so it gets lots of exercise.

Dave

[Andy M]

GetCarter said:

Every computer I've ever owned has slowed down over time (*Macs too)...

www.maintain.se/cocktail/index.html

[miniman]

Worth noting that Photoshop prefers to have its "scratch disk" on a phyically separate drive to the main program for optimum performance.

[rustybin]

My Commodore 64 is still doing a fine job with no notable drop off in performance. I bought a new audio tape for it last year (BASF) and that really seemed to improve back up time.




Incredibly small penis but really know how to use it.