A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Travel without a camera



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old June 21st 17, 04:27 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Travel without a camera

In article , PAS wrote:

I plan on getting an iMac within the next year to see how I like it.

Whichever Mac you choose I recommend at least 16 GB RAM.

The transition might annoy you a little bit at first as some things will be
different due to a lifetime of habits.

That said, I believe you will find your new experience with a Mac
surprisingly pleasant. Just be patient through the adaption period, keep an
open mind, and remember you can always run Windows 10 on your new Mac,
either
with a Bootcamp partition or VM. My recommendation would be to use VMware
Fusion.

I will definitely spec it with 16GB of RAM, no less. Yes, I've
developed quite a lot of habits using Windows for over 20 years. I'm
sure the transition won't be too frustrating. I'll have all the time I
need to get adapted - I'm retiring in 2 1/2 weeks.


what are you going to use the mac for?

don't assume that memory requirements of windows are the same as macos,
particularly when the mac has *extremely* fast ssd.
  #92  
Old June 21st 17, 04:27 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Travel without a camera

In article , -hh
wrote:


Overall, the problem is that Adobe's not currently using
the GPU for all processes. As such, it only has to 'fall
back' for the (still) relatively small set of subroutines
which do actually employ GPU acceleration...if & when
so invoked by one's workflow. For some users, that in of
itself may very well be effectively a "never" right from
the start.

not all things benefit from offloading to a gpu.

True enough.

when something benefits from the gpu, adobe uses the gpu.
if it doesn't, they don't.

that's exactly how it should be.

Within reason. The problem they have is that their design
architectural configuration traditionally was quite serial
and didn't allow for parallelism leveraging as parallelism
became more commonplace/feasible/beneficial.


nope. again, not everything benefits from parallelism.


Oh, so you've then made a self-contradiction.


nope

much of what photoshop does is i/o bound, which can't be parallelized.


But if it was I/O bound, then moving a computation from CPU to GPU
card & back wouldn't result in a performance gain.


many times it doesn't, and there is also the overhead of moving it back
and forth too.

photoshop uses the gpu only when it will accelerate a given operation.
if that operation would be faster on the cpu, then that's where it will
run.



Overall, Adobe's not really a particularly sophisticated user
of GPU potential

nonsense.

Oh, and you were doing so well!

The cited Adobe webpage made it pretty clear that their
software is limited to only using one GPU card at a time.


most people have one gpu card. it's optimized for the common case.

plus, a second gpu isn't necessarily better.

again, not everything benefits from one gpu, let alone two. lots of
apps don't use multiple gpus. adobe isn't unique in that regard.


Irrelevant & a distraction attempt.


nope. it's reality.

You're trying to deflect from admitting that you were wrong in disagreeing
with my statement that Adobe is not a particularly sophisticated user of
GPU potential.


of course i disagree. that statement is flat out absurd.

(and you conveniently snipped that text)

As I had said:

"Contrasting that limitation on sophistication, I can personally
recall working on a project with image analysis that used
multiple discrete GPU cards (IIRC, ~8) ... way back in 2004.


*that* is irrelevant (and why it was snipped).

what you did with some random analysis app in 2004 has absolutely
nothing whatsoever to do with photoshop.

they are two totally different apps, with two totally different code
bases and two totally different goals.

you're also oblivious to the fact that photoshop was using multiple
processors in the 1990s, ten years before you were working on that
project. there wasn't much gpu acceleration back then, but there were
dsp cards that dramatically accelerated photoshop.

Now you may wish to claim that Adobe is "sophisticated",


absolutely.

but compared to how others have done distributed graphical
processing across multiple discrete GPU cards, Adobe's
current status is over a decade behind the start of the art."


nonsense. complete utter nonsense.

And now you're trying to rationalize why Adobe only supports but a
single GPU card with a "most people" statement: that's a reasonably
good case for business optimization - - but it simply does not support
a claim of a superior level of technological sophistication.


what matters is whether the end result is faster, not how many gpus are
used.

using two gpus simply because two of them must be twice as good as one
is crazy. it's a bigger number so it must be better! doesn't work that
way.

the same applies to multi-core. some (ignorant) people bitch about how
photoshop doesn't always use all available cores. the answer is because
sometimes it's faster to do a particular task on 1 or 2 cores than it
is on 4 or 8 cores.

photoshop is *incredibly* optimized, even tuned to specific versions of
processors.

to claim that adobe is not sophisticated is absurd.
  #93  
Old June 21st 17, 04:40 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PAS[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 595
Default Travel without a camera

On 6/21/2017 11:27 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , PAS wrote:

I plan on getting an iMac within the next year to see how I like it.

did i read that correctly???

anyway, i suggest getting an 18 core imac pro. that should be enough.


Yes you read that right. I've mentioned it before. I've wanted one for
some time now. I've always admired the engineering/design of their
products.

  #94  
Old June 21st 17, 04:44 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Travel without a camera

In article , PAS wrote:

I plan on getting an iMac within the next year to see how I like it.

did i read that correctly???

anyway, i suggest getting an 18 core imac pro. that should be enough.


Yes you read that right. I've mentioned it before. I've wanted one for
some time now. I've always admired the engineering/design of their
products.


the design is more than skin deep too.

anyway, a more realistic suggestion would be a retina imac 5k with the
dci-p3 wide gamut display. they were just updated a few weeks ago.
  #95  
Old June 21st 17, 04:45 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PAS[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 595
Default Travel without a camera

On 6/21/2017 11:27 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , PAS wrote:

I plan on getting an iMac within the next year to see how I like it.
Whichever Mac you choose I recommend at least 16 GB RAM.

The transition might annoy you a little bit at first as some things will be
different due to a lifetime of habits.

That said, I believe you will find your new experience with a Mac
surprisingly pleasant. Just be patient through the adaption period, keep an
open mind, and remember you can always run Windows 10 on your new Mac,
either
with a Bootcamp partition or VM. My recommendation would be to use VMware
Fusion.

I will definitely spec it with 16GB of RAM, no less. Yes, I've
developed quite a lot of habits using Windows for over 20 years. I'm
sure the transition won't be too frustrating. I'll have all the time I
need to get adapted - I'm retiring in 2 1/2 weeks.

what are you going to use the mac for?

don't assume that memory requirements of windows are the same as macos,
particularly when the mac has *extremely* fast ssd.


Most likely I'll use it for Photoshop and other imaging apps. Maybe I'll
like it enough to use it for everything else too

Let's assume we have a Mac and a Windows PC with similar hardware
specs. How would the memory performance be different and why would it
be different? I'm ignorant as to how a Mac OS utilizes hardware. If we
take an SSD out of the equation for both comparable systems, is the
performance any different?

  #96  
Old June 21st 17, 04:46 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PAS[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 595
Default Travel without a camera

On 6/21/2017 11:27 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , PAS wrote:

If the number of PCs sold for business use were removed from the
equation, I highly doubt that the claim "when people have a choice they
*overwhelmingly* choose a Mac" is true. The majority of home users use
a Windows PC, not a Mac.

that's past tense, what they bought some years ago, not what they're
buying today and what they're buying going forward.


What the majority of home users are buying today are Windows PCs.

  #97  
Old June 21st 17, 04:49 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Travel without a camera

On Jun 21, 2017, PAS wrote
(in article ):

On 6/21/2017 10:53 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 21, 2017, PAS wrote
(in article ):

On 6/21/2017 10:02 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 21, 2017, PAS wrote
(in article ):

On 6/20/2017 4:49 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 20, 2017, nospam wrote
(in ) :

In , wrote:
Snip
Take out corporate sales and the numbers are still overwhelmingly in
favor of Windows PCs and you know that.
they aren't.

look around. there are ****loads of macs.
Why not just take a poll among the usual suspects in this room?

As best I can recall the Mac users here are Alan Browne, Davoud, David
B.,
Sandman, Whisky-Dave, you, and me. That is 7 confirmed, there might be a
few
more.

Confirmed Windows users are Eric, PeterN, Tony Cooper, PAS, Mayayana,
Bill
W,
Noons, David Taylor, and probably at least 5 more for around 13.

Then there is Floyd who has no time for Windows, or MacOS, along with
the
other Linux devotees.
We've got two desktops. One is an older HP in our guestroom that was
bought when Windows Vista was released. I have Windows 10 on it now and
it's still going strong. It gets used mostly by guests when they stay
over. My desktop is one I built about 1 1/2 years ago.

We have three laptops in the house. Mine is seldom used. My wife
refuses to give up her tired old laptop for the new one I bought her
over a year ago. But very soon she'll have no choice

I plan on getting an iMac within the next year to see how I like it.
Whichever Mac you choose I recommend at least 16 GB RAM.

The transition might annoy you a little bit at first as some things will
be
different due to a lifetime of habits.

That said, I believe you will find your new experience with a Mac
surprisingly pleasant. Just be patient through the adaption period, keep
an
open mind, and remember you can always run Windows 10 on your new Mac,
either
with a Bootcamp partition or VM. My recommendation would be to use VMware
Fusion.
I will definitely spec it with 16GB of RAM, no less. Yes, I've
developed quite a lot of habits using Windows for over 20 years. I'm
sure the transition won't be too frustrating. I'll have all the time I
need to get adapted - I'm retiring in 2 1/2 weeks.

Let me be the first to welcome you to the Great Army of the Gainfully
Unemployed.


Thank you! Lots of big changes on our lives. Retiring, selling or
home, packing up, leaving friends, heading to a new place for a new life.


IIRC your son is with NYPD. I guess he has his home somewhere in the NYC
area.
Where in NY is your home, and where are you planning to move?

I made the move from Upstate NY to California over 40 years ago and I am
quite content here on the California Central Coast in San Luis Obispo County.
My only issue this week has been the current heat wave. Since Thursday last
week we have had temperatures ranging from 103ºF-106ºF (39.4ºC-40.5ºC)
with no relief in the offing until the weekend when we should have a cold
snap in the mid 90’s.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #98  
Old June 21st 17, 04:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Travel without a camera

On Jun 21, 2017, nospam wrote
(in ) :

In , wrote:

I plan on getting an iMac within the next year to see how I like it.
did i read that correctly???

anyway, i suggest getting an 18 core imac pro. that should be enough.


Yes you read that right. I've mentioned it before. I've wanted one for
some time now. I've always admired the engineering/design of their
products.


the design is more than skin deep too.

anyway, a more realistic suggestion would be a retina imac 5k with the
dci-p3 wide gamut display. they were just updated a few weeks ago.


Yup! The 5K is on my upgrade spec list.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #99  
Old June 21st 17, 04:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Travel without a camera

In article , PAS wrote:

I will definitely spec it with 16GB of RAM, no less. Yes, I've
developed quite a lot of habits using Windows for over 20 years. I'm
sure the transition won't be too frustrating. I'll have all the time I
need to get adapted - I'm retiring in 2 1/2 weeks.

what are you going to use the mac for?

don't assume that memory requirements of windows are the same as macos,
particularly when the mac has *extremely* fast ssd.


Most likely I'll use it for Photoshop and other imaging apps.


then 16 gig is probably a good idea.

Maybe I'll
like it enough to use it for everything else too


you just might.

Let's assume we have a Mac and a Windows PC with similar hardware
specs. How would the memory performance be different and why would it
be different? I'm ignorant as to how a Mac OS utilizes hardware. If we
take an SSD out of the equation for both comparable systems, is the
performance any different?


why take the ssd out of the equation? ssds on the latest macs are much
faster than the ssds usually found on windows systems, especially if
they're using a sata ssd, benchmarking in the range of 3 gigabytes (not
bits) per second.
  #100  
Old June 21st 17, 04:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Travel without a camera

In article , PAS wrote:

If the number of PCs sold for business use were removed from the
equation, I highly doubt that the claim "when people have a choice they
*overwhelmingly* choose a Mac" is true. The majority of home users use
a Windows PC, not a Mac.

that's past tense, what they bought some years ago, not what they're
buying today and what they're buying going forward.


What the majority of home users are buying today are Windows PCs.


again, no.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Travel Camera Trundle Digital Photography 14 November 24th 14 09:00 PM
Ideal travel camera... AKT Digital Photography 5 November 18th 07 09:11 PM
Air Travel with LF Camera Ron Gans Large Format Photography Equipment 17 April 10th 07 10:34 PM
Need New Travel Camera rhonda Digital Photography 4 August 4th 06 04:56 PM
Digital travel camera [email protected] Film & Labs 0 January 29th 04 06:33 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.