Do the new Apple Laptops Cut It?

[cmm1970 1]

I currently use a Powerbook G4 and have a Nikon D2x. When I shoot NEF files and try to manipulate them with the G4, it is a slow aruduous grind. Recently I began to do some semi commercial work and I am dying a slow death running the files on this laptop. Question is though, for running batch conversions with either Nikon View or Photoshop, will the new PowerMac laptops offer enough speed enhancement or am I going to have to go to a desktop? Please share your experiences.

 

Thanks,

Mike

[Drew 0]

I currently use a Powerbook G4 and have a Nikon D2x. When I shoot NEF files and try to manipulate them with the G4, it is a slow aruduous grind. Recently I began to do some semi commercial work and I am dying a slow death running the files on this laptop. Question is though, for running batch conversions with either Nikon View or Photoshop, will the new PowerMac laptops offer enough speed enhancement or am I going to have to go to a desktop? Please share your experiences.

 

Thanks,

Mike

 

If you are using Photoshop, it won't be that much of an improvement with the Macbook Pro 2.33ghz until the Creative Suite 3 is out next quarter. However, anything that is universal binary will definitely benefit (ie Aperture). Of course, for serious big files a desktop would give optimum performance. The quad Mac pro are much faster than any macbook pro.

If you feel glacial now with Nikon Capture, you won't see a difference due to the non- UB rosetta emulation for NC. But then again, I haven't used NC or PS for raw conversions. I use capture one or aperture.

[cmm1970 1]

So I am to understand that by using CS2 I would be served more speedy file processing if I was running a Windows based notebook or desktop?

[anthp 0]

So I am to understand that by using CS2 I would be served more speedy file processing if I was running a Windows based notebook or desktop?

All else being equal, the current answer would be yes. Of course you could always generate the same advantages by using boot camp or paralells to run a Windows version of CS2 on the mac, but I probably wouldn't bother.

 

Another alternative might be to wait for the UB of CS2 to arrive early next year. It might coincide with Apple dropping the new 800 ghz FSB chips into the MBPs which would give you a double whammy.

 

Yet another option would be to try a faster UB RAW converter like Bibble which is the only thing that makes my G4 seem quick at the moment. I'm holding off until next year for the hardware upgrade. Software is cheap.

[hoovermd 0]

Don't know about Adobe products but I've got a 2.33 Ghz (Intel Core 2 Duo) Mac Book pro w/ 2Gb of RAM and it runs Aperture seemingly just as well as my dual 2.5Ghz Power PC G5 w/ 5Gb of RAM.

 

I'm sure there are some differences but I can't readily tell

 

I'm sure when I actually start making the MBP work a bit I might notice but so far, it isn't annoying.

[richorn 0]

I am using the current MBP 17" with my D2Xs files, converting with both Lightroom and the Adobe Creative Suite 2.

 

In all cases it has been fast enough, and as fast as any PC I had previously.

 

I just finished both a Pro shoot of 1200 images and a dive trip of 1800. Speed has rarely been an issue.

[cmm1970 1]

I am using the current MBP 17" with my D2Xs files, converting with both Lightroom and the Adobe Creative Suite 2.

 

In all cases it has been fast enough, and as fast as any PC I had previously.

 

I just finished both a Pro shoot of 1200 images and a dive trip of 1800. Speed has rarely been an issue.

 

So what I am to hear is that you are pushing the big NEF files around, converting in the two applications, and you are not pulling your hair out waiting on the machine to deal with these 1000+ images in your database for each shoot with your D2x.

 

That would make me happy. I have been grinding away with my G4 Powerbook and it takes a lot of the fun out of the hobby for me.

 

Thanks,

Mike

[cmm1970 1]

I took the plunge last weekend and purchased a MacBook Pro. I installed Aperature this weekend, watched the tutorial, and proceeded to handle a load of NEF files and large JPG's. It worked fabulously and very fast compared to what I am used to. If any of you are considering this combination, I encourage you to go for it. I have not been disappointed!

[loftus 42]

I agree wholeheartedly; and the more you learn Aperture features, the more I think you will like it.

[Rocha 0]

Can Aperture handle D2x NEF files?

 

Edit: Just checked Aperture's info in the web and saw that it handles D2x files. I will take a serious look at it, as Nikon Capture is really slow.

[loftus 42]

You can download a 30 day free trial on the Apple website; only proviso is you have to have one of the more recent Apple machines with a faster video card

Can Aperture handle D2x NEF files?

 

Edit: Just checked Aperture's info in the web and saw that it handles D2x files. I will take a serious look at it, as Nikon Capture is really slow.

[Canuck 3]

I purchased a 15" MacBook Pro and Aperture a month ago, before my trip to Palau. I am extremely pleased with the system. It is very fast and easy to use. I have just finished processing all 500+ of my keeper photos. I had no need to leave Aperture and go to PSCS2 for any of my processing. Aperture has all the tools I need, so far.

 

FYI, my Aperture database is currently 40+ GB of photos.

[aczyzyk 0]

Does anyone use Aperture on a Macbook (not Pro)?

Processors are basically the same, so does a graphic card alone make significant difference?

I could think about few alternative uses for the extra $ pro version costs.

[loftus 42]

When you install Aperture it will actually check that you have the right hardware, and will not install unless it likes your hardware, primarily the graphics catd I beleive. Some folks have apparently hacked a workaround that allows installation with other machines. I do not know if it runs adequately though in those situations.

[aczyzyk 0]

Well, I'm one of these folks. I run it on 12" G4 iBook. It works but requires lots of patience. I want to upgrade my laptop. I just wonder if Macbook will be good enough. Anyway, I'll probably wait until Leopard.

[loftus 42]

I'm sorry, I misunderstood you. I have a friend who runs it on a new Macbook (not a pro), and it runs well apparently.

[aczyzyk 0]

This is good news. Thanks.

[BotSO 0]

I ran Aperture on a 15" 1.5Ghz G4 PowerBook.

 

I now use Lightroom on a 17" 2.33 Ghz Core2Duo MacBook Pro.

 

I much prefer LR on the MPB to Aperture on either.

[jetlife2 0]

I ran Aperture on a 15" 1.5Ghz G4 PowerBook.

 

I now use Lightroom on a 17" 2.33 Ghz Core2Duo MacBook Pro.

 

I much prefer LR on the MPB to Aperture on either.

 

 

Did you try LR when it was beta? I used it extensively and now the beta has expired. Just wondering if there was any major change from the last beta, before I buy.

 

Also, a related question, what are the other choices for RAW processing on a Mac other than LR and Aperture? (note: Aperture won't read my RAW files, Oly 5060; LR worked superbly even as beta). Thanks

[Drew 0]

Well now the truth is out... so to speak:

 

Apple Macbook Pro Lawsuit on LCD screens

 

Seems that the LCD screen, while very bright, isn't 8bit but 6 bit + dithering.

 

Very interesting indeed.

[craig 0]

I agree, Drew, that it's very interesting but it's just an accusation. I'm very interested in how this plays out. Matching part numbers to spec sheets looks bad for Apple though. How could "the choice of creative professionals" do this? ;-)

 

I have a MBP 17" that I just got recently that's plagued by awful backlighting (among other things ) but I've never suspected that the display, or the 15" before it, was limited to 6 bits, seen any signs of dithering, graininess or sparklies, etc. My main complaint is that I want more resolution. Sadly, the trend has been away from the higher resolution notebook panels.

 

I decided, reluctantly, to switch to OS X with the CS3/Lightroom upgrade. I like the MBP package and the trackpad is great, but I could be easily convinced there are better road notebooks for photographers. On the other hand, my day-old Mac Pro has been very impressive so far. It really infuriates me, though, that Apple has known about the IBM T221 for so long, has supported it successfully in the past, recognizes its video modes and selects them, yet utterly fails to support it properly or even boot with it as the primary display. It's hard giving up that monitor and impossible using it at 13Hz.

[Drew 0]

Craig

I don't think Apple really supported it. It was the GPU makers which supported it. Dual Dual-Link DVI cards are hard to come by in desktops.

Maybe you should get a desktop to run it and network the laptop to transfer files. With 802.11n, even big files should be pretty quick.

[craig 0]

I'm not sure of the working relationship between Apple and the GPU suppliers when it comes to video mode support. I'm sure you're right that it's the vendor that's tasked with doing that. Apple, though, should either retain monitors for test, disable video modes that they won't certify, or make the process of using 3rd party monitors more forgiving. It's one thing for a monitor to go into a funky mode and another for the system to fail to work at all. Apple doesn't have the (annoying) 15 second confirm that Windows does but in this case it's really helpful! In any case, T221 users seem to have little interest in the Apple platform. I think the T221 combined with the scalable interface promises of Leopard would be compelling.

 

Part of my switch was to build a small form factor Vista box so that I could retain Windows capability when I needed it. Getting the T221 to work with Vista using only low profile cards was comical though I did achieve it. Funny thing is that Vista benchmarked my 3D capability at 2.9 and it disables Aero below 3.0! No matter, Aero is a joke. I swear, Vista is a friggin catastrophe.

 

The T221 uses 1, 2, or 4 single link DVI-D's. The DG5 version came with a dual link convertor box and supported a triple link mode. I don't have that version and I'm perfectly satisfied with 31 Hz achievable with 2 DVI ports. I did buy a Mac Pro with an X1900 hoping to get the monitor to work but I think it's a lost cause. I could try an NVidia card as they are a bit better with T221 support on the Windows side. Right now it works only as a 2nd monitor using a single link at 13Hz. Switching from 100 dpi to 200 dpi and using a twinhead system is out of the question. Viewing distances are much different and the mouse acceleration blows. :-( Looks like a 30" is in my future. I hate 100 dpi.

[TheRealDrew 0]

Seems that the LCD screen, while very bright, isn't 8bit but 6 bit + dithering.

 

Very interesting indeed.

 

It is kind of funny that both plaintiffs went and bought two machines, one in fact 6 months after the first one. So they knew what the screens looked like

 

That being said, yeah it seems some people have had issues with the screens

 

Some fun reading, the papers that were filed.

 

http://stadium.weblogsinc.com/engadget/vid...ook_lawsuit.pdf

 

I am not sure I totally agree with some of the arguments being raised and it will be interesting on how it all shakes out. When I have to do final correction on video or photos I personally would not rely on any laptop screen for final use for the most part (maybe some web work). It is interesting that when running Paralells or Bootcamp the problem went away for people, so maybe a quick software update can do the trick. Still will be 6 bit though.