1Ds Mark II - computing

[chris_townsend1]

Well, I've taken the plunge and switched from film to digital and

can't wait. I've ordered my 1ds mark II (along with the appropriate

accessories) and it should hopefully be here middle of next week.

My question is (and I don't want to open up a can of worms with this

and start a debate that should not take place in this forum, but i

need a little advice)... I'm currently using a PC, but the files

that this camera throws out are going to be huge! I'm familiar with

the workings of both PC's & Mac's, but PREFER the interface

and "feel" of a PC - both are good machines in my mind. What sort

of computing power will it take to comfortably process the images?

Should I just build a custom PC? or perhaps the Mac? Any feedback

is helpful as I know i'm going to need a new one no matter what, but

wanted to make sure it could handle the situation. Thanks!

[john_jovic]

I use a 1dsMk2 on a PC. The PC is XP, 3.2Mhz, 2GbRam, 2 x 10000rpm SATA drives in a raid 0 array (which is used purely as a work disk for the image files) with a 7200rpm sata drive for the operating system and all other data. Works a treat although I'm sure you can spend much more and get better performance but the above spec really does work well.

 

JJ

[peter_foiles2]

All the MAC vs PC stuff really boils down to which platform you are most comfortable with. Photoshop is Photoshop no matter the platform. IF PC is your thing then by all means go PC. A custom built PC will definitely give you the most bang for the buck. Concentrate on getting plenty of speedy HD space and plenty of speedy ram and you will be in good shape.

[christopher_bibbs]

My wife works has a Mac and I use a PC with very similar specs. We occasionally switch machines and aside from trying to remember how the various hot key combinations change (alt becomes command, iirc), there really isn't a difference. So from that standpoint it is a coin toss.

 

My current box is running XP on a +2000 AMD chip with 1GB RAM and 10,000RPM drive. While normal Photoshop actions are fine, if I want to batch process a bunch of RAWs into PSD files and make some small JPEGS out of them for use as proofs, I queue them up, calculate 30 seconds per file, and go make coffee. Processor is definitely the weak point.

[eric_perlberg]

Chris,

 

Although I personally work on a Mac, if you feel happy with a PC, there's no point in

changing. What you do want is a fast pc. There was a very recent discussion on this exact

point <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CtMR">

here</a>

<p>Basically you want a dual processor or dual dual core machine. You want fast hard

drives. You want lots of RAM. There are all kinds of strategies to max out Photoshop CS

including separate fast scratch disks. It was all in the discussion mentioned above. Getting

enough money is the only factor which is not covered.

<p>

The camera is great. Enjoy!

[chris_townsend1]

Thanks for the feedback! It helps a lot. I'll probably stick with the PC just because I enjoy the way it works more. Probably will just get the parts and build a custom one so I know it's the way it should be - that sounds like the best option. Thanks again for your responses and let me know if you have any other thoughts... ct

[fernando lopez]

20GB harddisk and 512 MB will do fine if you only process your files and tweak in Photoshop. THat's how I do it. I just burn all my files to cd's and pronto! My PC only has breezebrowser and Photoshop installed. It works superfast and cost me $ 400. Get a good 100 MhZ monitor with Trinitron technology though. Oh, and profile it for color management.

[fernando lopez]

"You want lots of RAM. There are all kinds of strategies to max out Photoshop CS including separate fast scratch disks."

 

Not necesary at all if you only install your RAW converter and Photoshop on your pc. It's throwing away money. Invest in very good CRT monitor and a Colormanagement tool.

[christopher_bibbs]

I had to tweak my machine a while back and I found that while PS7 still works fine with 512MB of RAM, CS2 makes a significant performance jump between 512MB and 1GB. Above 2GB, there is no noticeable improvement. So unless you super multi-task or have some other memory hog application, going much above 2GB probably isn't worth it.

[mendel_leisk]

"I'm currently using a PC" Could you be a wee bit more specific.

 

"the files that this camera throws out are going to be huge!" Around 30 megs per raw (my guestimate, extrapolating from my 20D file size) is huge? I dunno, Scan Elite 5400 16 bit rgb files are north of 200 megs each. The typical current pentium box would be fine, albeit with a gig of ram, for Photoshop. For hard drive requirements, just do the math.

[eric_perlberg]

The 1dsMk2 RAW files are 100mb in size. Chris, do your research. There's some significantly bizarre info above. You might want to have a read through some of the memory articles on <a href="http://photoshopnews.com/2005/07/19/photoshop-cs2-performance-articles/"> this page</a>. Articles are either straight from programmers on Photoshop or Beta testers.

[jim_roof]

1Ds Mark II RAW files are about 14-16 megs each, maybe a 17 megger every now and then.

 

100 megs? Where did THAT come from? You only get close to 100 megs if you convert them and save them as 16 bit tiff files.

[mendel_leisk]

I was thinking the pixel dims were doubled (from 8meg 20D) for my "guestimate", but that is not the case, it's the *area* that is more-or-less doubled, which would double file size (for the .cr2 raw file), as Jim says.

 

I would only use tiff format temporarily, for editing, then convert them to jpeg.

[eric_perlberg]

<i>100 megs? Where did THAT come from? You only get close to 100 megs if you convert them and save them as 16 bit tiff files.</i><p>

 

when you open a RAW file from a 1ds2 in photoshop the file size is 95+megs. This has nothing to do with saving them in tiff or any other format, it's the working file size in Photoshop. This is the file size you need to deal with when planning what your computer has to handle using photoshop with a 1DsMKII which is the subject of this thread. Even a RAW 5mpx camera file opens up at around 20mb in Photoshop.

<p>

RAW files from any digital camera are (nominally) 16 bit files. Working in 16 bit is one of the advantages of using RAW. If you want 8 bit files you have to convert the RAW file. Tiff has nothing to do with any of this. You do not convert an 8 bit RAW file to 16 bits.

<p>

The (8 bit) high quality jpgs (not RAW) straight out of this camera open up at 50mb in Photoshop.

[eric_perlberg]

<i>if you only install your RAW converter and Photoshop on your pc. It's throwing away money</i>

<p>

Not according to <a href="http://www.adobe.com/support/techdocs/320005.html">Adobe</a>