Dream Time ~ dark room set up

[JBW]

Hi, In a perfect world I would be rich, handsome and talented. Alas, of the three I might be talented. So if you don't mind can you give me a little help in my dream.

I currently own a four year old Lenovo G570 laptop. Sony Express pushes it very hard. If I was to get Sony Express Pro I think smoke would be coming out of the laptop.

So... in the 500 to 1,000 US dollar range what laptop, desktop, all in one, workstation would you suggest? And if it is a desktop what monitor?

Remember it will need to get to the Philippines where 22% will be added to cover duty and taxes. Smaller is better for shipping.
B.

[Manfred M]

How much memory (RAM) do you have in your laptop? Often adding more RAM fixes the problem you seem to be describing for a lot less money than a new machine. I would not ever get a machine with less than 8GB of RAM, otherwise the poor little beast will spend its time swapping out to the hard drive. A lot of these machines did ship with 4GB and that is simply not enough. Processor speed is not necessarily all that important as photo editing is not particularly CPU resource intense.

Secondly, what operating system do you use? Again, Windows 8's memory management is a lot better than Windows 7, and Windows 10 comes out later this month and we can see how it performs.

When you are working, are you shutting down all other programs that are running; that does free up more RAM under Windows 7.

[JBW]

Just 2 GB. (it is old) Windows 7, waiting for windows 10 hoping it will run sony express. And absolutely to shutting everything else off.

[Manfred M]

That is your problem - I assume your machine has a 64-bit operating system, rather than a 32-bit? Otherwise the machine cannot address more than around 3.5 GB of RAM.

I checked on the internet; it seems your machine can handle up to 8GB of RAM (2 x 4GB). Even taking it up to 4GB is going to improve things for you.

The machine I am doing all my work on is definitely older than yours but I had to increase the amount of RAM memory as time went on in order for it to operate with more modern software.

[JBW]

That is your problem - I assume your machine has a 64-bit operating system, rather than a 32-bit? Otherwise the machine cannot address more than around 3.5 GB of RAM.

I checked on the internet; it seems your machine can handle up to 8GB of RAM (2 x 4GB). Even taking it up to 4GB is going to improve things for you.

The machine I am doing all my work on is definitely older than yours but I had to increase the amount of RAM memory as time went on in order for it to operate with more modern software.

I am thinking next time I am in town i will see of i can find some ram mem. Thanks for the help.

[Stagecoach]

Brian, I'm running Windows 7 on my desktop (a fairly mediocre machine) and recently went from 4GB to 8GB of RAM and the difference was amazing.

Before this change I could only do about an hours PP work during which time it would gradually get slower and lock up. Simply adding the additional memory (nothing else) I have a machine that I can PP on all night at good speed

[JBW]

Brian, I'm running Windows 7 on my desktop (a fairly mediocre machine) and recently went from 4GB to 8GB of RAM and the difference was amazing.

Before this change I could only do about an hours PP work during which time it would gradually get slower and lock up. Simply adding the additional memory (nothing else) I have a machine that I can PP on all night at good speed

Now all I need to do is to find some in town.

[chauncey]

With all due respect to my friend Manfred...my geek son recently built me a new desktop and
insisted on using Windows 7 64 bit as an OS. It needs to be said though, that I have two SS
HDs and tons of RAM. Additionally, multitasking is a taboo.

[rpcrowe]

I will also pipe in that increasing RAM allowed my computer to work more smoothly and stopped my CS6 from crashing intermittently. It also helped me play Youtube videos without hanging up.

Manfred's idea of shutting down all the other programs to free up RAM is a good one!

[Manfred M]

With all due respect to my friend Manfred...my geek son recently built me a new desktop and
insisted on using Windows 7 64 bit as an OS. It needs to be said though, that I have two SS
HDs and tons of RAM. Additionally, multitasking is a taboo.

Your geek son has built you an nice desktop machine, I suspect.

Your geek moderator has built many nice desktop machines too, but when it comes to laptops, the situation is far more limited as they tend to come pre-built with very limited choice on options unless you are looking at a special order. This includes the OS.

Geeks tend to dislike the Windows 8, mostly because of the kludgy user interface, but there are very easy workarounds to that problem. The memory management in Win 8 is superior to Win 7. As well, there is no 16 GB RAM limit that Win 7 Home has.

[JBW]

Geeks tend to dislike the Windows 8, mostly because of the kludgy user interface, but there are very easy workarounds to that problem. The memory management in Win 8 is superior to Win 7. As well, there is no 16 GB RAM limit that Win 7 Home has.

Not being a geek I shall let others battle out the geek wars. I am however enrolled to get the Windows 10 in a few weeks. But before i install it I will wait to see iif it has issues with Sony Express.

From what I have gleaned from this thread it seems to me that I need to
(1) increase my ram
(2) find a new 16 bit pp software to replace Gimp. (suggestions gladly accepted)
(3) become geekified
(4) practice

[Manfred M]

find a new 16 bit pp software to replace Gimp.

Why? Many of my postings are done from jpegs using 8-bit. I don't think any of the images from my recent Boston area images came from raw data.

I do feel it is important to know how to use raw, in case you need to. But I usually don't need to when my exposure is correct.

[JBW]

Why? Many of my postings are done from jpegs using 8-bit. I don't think any of the images from my recent Boston area images came from raw data.

I do feel it is important to know how to use raw, in case you need to. But I usually don't need to when my exposure is correct.

Okay this may be a brain malfunction on my part but didn't someone say that if i am working in 8 - bit I am loosing half of the information the camera captures?

[Stagecoach]

Not being a geek I shall let others battle out the geek wars. I am however enrolled to get the Windows 10 in a few weeks. But before i install it I will wait to see iif it has issues with Sony Express.

From what I have gleaned from this thread it seems to me that I need to
(1) increase my ram
(2) find a new 16 bit pp software to replace Gimp. (suggestions gladly accepted)
(3) become geekified
(4) practice

Ok Brian, I'll throw in another.

You are presently working on a laptop, how good is the screen on that laptop?

I raise this because I recently purchased a mid range laptop for the sole purpose of communication and storage and of which the colour was appalling. It was so bad and I was unable to manually make it anywhere near acceptable (to me) for looking at photos that I purchased a calibrator a week later.

Whilst the calibration made a significant difference/improvement it reported that it is only showing 48% of sRGB gamut. This does not bother me at all as I will not be using that laptop for photo editing.

You are talking about 16 bit pp software and also working in Adobe colour space in another thread so the question I will ask, that hopefully others may give their views is 'how good is your laptop screen' ?

Grahame

[Manfred M]

Okay this may be a brain malfunction on my part but didn't someone say that if i am working in 8 - bit I am loosing half of the information the camera captures?

Brian - from a freeware standpoint, Gimp is the most powerful editor out there. If you want a stable-release version, you are stuck with using what you have. If you were to switch to a commercial piece of software that handled 16-bit, then perhaps working from raw data would make sense. Hopefully, one of these days Gimp will migrate to 16-bit as a "final" build and your problem will be solved.

I can't see any of my recent Boston trip images becoming wall hangers, so I shot and processes AdobeRGB images that were converted to sRGB before posting them here. Had any of them been destined for the printer, then raw and ProPhoto all the way. Part of the reason I did this was to make a point; there are a lot of people that seem to think that you can't get a high quality image if you shoot jpeg, and I am doing my best to suggest that most of the time that is simply not true.

I suspect that all of your good images will end up posted on the internet, which means an 8-bit sRGB jpeg as an end product, so in your case sticking with what you have might be a decent solution. You are going to be throwing much of the data away anyway to create an image that you can post.

Now if you started looking at printed output using a 10 or 12 colour inkjet printer, then I would suggest that you use raw files, convert them to wide colour space like ProPhoto. With this technology, you would be working with a colour space that is even wider than AdobeRGB. Likewise, if you had a 16-bit editor, I would certainly suggest you work with raw files, just to learn how to get top notch results out of them, that way if you ever needed to, you'd have the necessary skills to do so.

Like many other photographic issues, there is no one size fits all answer.

[JBW]

Ok Brian, I'll throw in another.

You are presently working on a laptop, how good is the screen on that laptop?

I raise this because I recently purchased a mid range laptop for the sole purpose of communication and storage and of which the colour was appalling. It was so bad and I was unable to manually make it anywhere near acceptable (to me) for looking at photos that I purchased a calibrator a week later.

Whilst the calibration made a significant difference/improvement it reported that it is only showing 48% of sRGB gamut. This does not bother me at all as I will not be using that laptop for photo editing.

You are talking about 16 bit pp software and also working in Adobe colour space in another thread so the question I will ask, that hopefully others may give their views is 'how good is your laptop screen' ?

Grahame

I have no idea. But I work on two screens. The Lenov0 G570 and an Optiquest. They have both been calibrated to the best of my ability and they are very similar in presentation. As I type Grumpy Diver's avatar is directly below. I can nicely make out a red triangle above his righ hand, the oranges are bright and there is a luminous yellow stripe just under the orange triangle. the flesh tones look good and the snow? ice? looks a bluish white.

As I said I do not know how good my monitors are but to my eyes they seem to create lifelike colours in other photographs. A member just posted a butterfly on a milkweed shot and it was breathtaking.
Brian

[JBW]

Brian - from a freeware standpoint, Gimp is the most powerful editor out there.

I can't see any of my recent Boston trip images becoming wall hangers, so I shot and processes AdobeRGB images that were converted to sRGB before posting them here. Had any of them been destined for the printer, then raw and ProPhoto all the way. Part of the reason I did this was to make a point; there are a lot of people that seem to think that you can't get a high quality image if you shoot jpeg, and I am doing my best to suggest that most of the time that is simply not true.

Like many other photographic issues, there is no one size fits all answer.

I should point out that my Cicada skeleton shot was shot in JPEG and processed in Gimp. You have my support about not needing RAW.

SWMBO has for 20+ years told me that I can become a tad over focused. She might even say obsessed. Maybe, just maybe I have gone a little overboard on finding the ultimate pp.

Mind you she agrees that a tad more ram would be a good thing.

I am finding that Sony express does nice things to my shots. It has more subtlety than Gimp and allows me to get a better end product. Even when I am shooting in JPEG it has some adjustments that nicely compliment Gimp.

And as you have reminded me... unless I am going to get into printing anything more than I already have will just get lost on the web anyway. At least I think thats what you said.

[Manfred M]

And as you have reminded me... unless I am going to get into printing anything more than I already have will just get lost on the web anyway. At least I think thats what you said.

Exactly. Any image that we see on the web, via a web browser (Firefox and Chrome are the only two browsers that are colour managed, so far as I can tell) is limited to sRBG, or just over 1/3 of the colours that we humans can see. Post an AdobeRGB or wide gamut colour space image, and these will be interpreted as sRGB and will look rather "muddy". This really doesn't matter to most viewers as most of the computer screens out there are not capable of reproducing more than basic RGB anyway.

And anyone who posts a monochrome image is throwing away even more data, as in B&W image, as all channels are set to the same value (R, G and B), so really you are effectively throwing away two of the three channels of data.

[JBW]

Exactly. Any image that we see on the web, via a web browser (Firefox and Chrome are the only two browsers that are colour managed, so far as I can tell) is limited to sRBG, or just over 1/3 of the colours that we humans can see. Post an AdobeRGB or wide gamut colour space image, and these will be interpreted as sRGB and will look rather "muddy". This really doesn't matter to most viewers as most of the computer screens out there are not capable of reproducing more than basic RGB anyway.

And anyone who posts a monochrome image is throwing away even more data, as in B&W image, as all channels are set to the same value (R, G and B), so really you are effectively throwing away two of the three channels of data.

Seems to me then that I already have a reasonable dark room set up. What will make the most difference are my skills. Those are easy to work on.

One final question oh guru of the computer innards: Do you have a suggestion for a brand of memory stick in 4GB? Everyone on the web declares theirs to be the best.
B.

[Manfred M]

One final question oh guru of the computer innards: Do you have a suggestion for a brand of memory stick in 4GB? Everyone on the web declares theirs to be the best.
B.

You should be looking at the fastest memory speed your computer can handle and if your machine can handle 8GB, rather than 4, I would go with that. Brands I rarely look at. As long as you walk away from the computer store and the machine is running properly, I wouldn't get to wrapped up on specific brands.