 |
| |
| This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you. |
| Moderated by: chrisbet, | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
jk
|
Just when you thought it was getting safe to come out of the water.Adobe do it again. https://www.dpreview.com/news/6803937117/adobe-won-t-support-older-operating-systems-with-its-next-major-creative-cloud-update?utm_source=self-desktop&utm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source Thanks goodness I decided to give them the boot. May they rot in hell. For people who are frustrated by Adobe's arrogant attitude I suggest you look at other vendors such as Macphun (SkyLum), Luminar, Aurora; Serif Affinity Photo, Affinity Designer and Affinity Publisher (beta currently); AlienSkin Exposure4X, etc.... |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Steady on JK, your going to have a heart attack!!!  Almost anybody with serious photographic needs is likely to be running a computer with a fairly up to date OS. Therefore not an issue for the majority, don't know anything about Windows but El-Capitan is history in the Mac world. The idea of software running on legacy OS's can only go so far back, the complexity, bloat and snags of trying to achieve that for a limited number of users can't be justified. In my opinion that's why there are so many issues with Windows because they try to make it run-on thousands of different hardware combinations and work with a wide range of software vendors, all with their own ideas. There has to be an OS cut off sometimes, for the benefit of the majority of users. How far back do we go? OS7.6, OS 9.1, or OS10.1? Windows 3.1 anybody? Don't think so! LOL |
|||||||||
jk
|
Nothing wrong with Snow Leopards! El Capitan is beautiful as I can attest to having been there! Lion is Ok but is I agree a little long in the tooth so is no longer king! I can agree the 64bit place provides much better functionality than a 32bit one. However I would also say that it is not Adobe's place to tell their customers what to do wrt hardware purchase. I think (actually I know) that my MacPro 3.0GHz 8 cores El Capitan outperforms some of the current Apple hardware. I will be carrying it back to UK for use there alongside my MacMini server 2012 which definitely outperforms current hardware! Sorry I just wish Adobe management would concentrate on producing good software instead of coralling customers. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Not really bothered with keeping up with latest software, be that Adobes offerings or anyone else's...unless it offers clear benefits. Too often these are submerged with a host of inconsequential additions that are a some young software engineers idea of 'wouldn't it be good if'. What does frustrate me is the inclusion of Camera Raw in this restrictive practise. It's surely a minor addition to keep up? The inability to open latest Nikon camera's raw files into older versions of Photoshop is a major annoyance to me....and the reason I won't pay Adobe any more money. |
|||||||||
jk
|
I told Adobe many years ago that if they spun out Adobe Camera RAW they would have more happy customers and bigger profits but they took no notice. I have Adobe CS6 Design Studio with MetaRAW plugin which replaces ACR and goves me RAW support for all the latest cameras. https://thepluginsite.com/products/metaraw/ I cant recommend this plugin more highly. |
|||||||||
Iain
|
Robert wrote:Steady on JK, your going to have a heart attack!!! Unfortunately Robert my Mac pro is a 3.1 so is maxed out with El-Capitan so I'm knackered and I don't intend buying a new Mac just to run Lightroom and PS. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:I told Adobe many years ago that if they spun out Adobe Camera RAW they would have more happy customers and bigger profits but they took no notice. Thanks Will have a look when I get back home from hols.  |
|||||||||
jk
|
Iain wrote:Robert wrote: Yep, you and me too! |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Oh dear, I didn't know you were on a MacPro Iain and I thought JK was on a high spec 5.1 MacPro.  I thought it was me who was struggling on with old kit. I don't think I can run Mojave so I may have hit the buffers too, the initial beta release refused, although there was some mention of later compatibility for the MacPro 5.1's. I will wait for the final public release before I try again. One saving grace is that the earlier Mac Pro's can take PCIe cards and should run PCIe mounted SSD's directly to the processor, as I described elsewhere. That has transformed my MacPro, it's again responsive and very quick. The PCIe cards are quite cheap and simple, they don't need drivers or any software, they just work. I run two 250 GB SSD's, one with the OS on it, the other with my Lightroom catalogues, previews and my 'recent' image files, currently all my 2018 images and Christophers 2018 images. Putting the Lightroom 'lrcat' files on the SSD was a real winner, it transformed Lightroom. Previously I was scrolling through images in library mode and the beach ball would pop up way too frequently, far too slow for comfort. After transferring the Lightroom 'lrcat' and preview files to the SSD I could wiz through a full year of images as fast as I could scroll them through, with no beach balls at all in Library mode. My Mp boots in about 25 seconds, from gong to sign in. Up to the gong the startup checks are taking place, the actual loading of the OS doesn't start until after the gong. Looking on the bright side the current functionality of Lightroom and Photoshop are pretty good. I think Adobe are concentrating on playing catch up with the cloud version of Lr. I do find the 'Auto' adjustments in Lr are a great time saver to a starting point for individual adjustments. The Lr geometry feature almost gives view camera functionality geometry wise. Even more so if you need barrel or pincushion adjustment, what strikes me about that feature is that it's so accessible, we have the same functionality in Ps but it's not as easy to use. Probably more powerful but for a quick geometry adjustment the Lr version wins for me. |
|||||||||
jk
|
So your upped 5,1 wont run Mojave? That is a good reason for me not to try to up my 3,1 to 5,1 So it looks that I need to examine what Apple has for a replacement. I really think the new MacPro 'dustbin style' is not a great design for a computer but what I call token iconography. The latest MacPro has no internal disk expansion so everything is hung outside. I have that with a MacMini which I use now more than my MacPro and I hate the spaghetti and on/off switches for all the disks. I hae to say this but I might end up with a Windows hardware running as a Linux server that is network linked to my Macs. We seem to be reducing choice at present rather than offering greater choice in so many things. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
It wouldn't run the installer for the first beta update to Mojave from High Sierra. When I looked into it briefly I saw a note to the effect that later updates would work on the 5.1 computer but quite frankly I have so much on my plate right now that I really couldn't spare the time to get involved, especially since my current setup is working so well. If the public version of Mojave will install then I will update it but as far as I am concerned High Sierra, 10.13.6 is doing a sterling job and I can't see any NEED to go further. Attachment: Screen Shot 2018-08-31 at 20.55.52.jpg (Downloaded 20 times) |
|||||||||
Robert
|
As for the bin design MacPro 6.1, I agree, it's simply a CPU, albeit fast, I don't like the idea of all the external hardware. If done properly it can be neat but you have to do a lot of planning and spend a lot on high end peripherals like external PCIe boxes running through Thunderbolt ports, there is no doubt it will do the business but for what I need the 5.1 is ideal with it all in one box, with some external drives for backup and specific projects, archive etc. For a full, high spec system I would guess at a minimum of £15,000 for the full kit, possibly a lot more. One and a half top Nikkor lenses? If I came across a MP 5.1 and I had some cash I would get one. I think they are reasonably future proof, as good as anything else about. I don't think I would go to the 6.1 due to the complexity. Even if it meant lagging behind a bit with the software. I am currently assessing the running costs of the 5.1 and peripherals. It's currently running at 49.1% of my total electric usage this year. I have to reduce that, drastically. This is a graph of my usage... Attachment: Screen Shot 2018-09-01 at 10.34.48.jpg (Downloaded 23 times) |
|||||||||
jk
|
Do you leave your MacPro computer on all the time? Does Computer mean compute environment, e.g. computer(s), screens, routers, printers, etc. I guess the MacPro uses a huge part and is less efficient than a MacMini. I tend to use my MacMini i7 server (2012) mostly. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
jk wrote:Do you leave your MacPro computer on all the time? Yes I only put it to sleep at night or if I go out shoppin etc. If I am away overnight I turn it off but usually leave the router on, unless I will be away for several days.. I have removed the UPS for now, trying to reduce complicating factors. Had a nasty moment with the UPS, I tried to install a meter before it and a meter after it. Idea being to subtract one from the other which would have told me the loss in the UPS but before I got that far the meter on the UPS output started to smoke... the screen went black and it got VERY hot. I quickly turned things off and removed the meter from the UPS output. I suspect the modified waveform didn't suit the circuitry in the meter. Perhaps along the lines that Geoff warned about with car battery inverters, after all the UPS uses an inverter with a modified sine wave, it's a 1500W APS unit from about 2009 or 10. You can get pure sine wave inverters but they are expensive I think Yes, I have a dedicated 'clean' supply for the computer and all the ancillaries, that is what the graph is based on. I also have the router on the same circuit and that on most of the time unless I am away. I have another meter which only records the MacPro itself. Still evaluating the detailed readings but it obviously is taking the lions share of the usage. I am going to try removing all the spinning drives for a while, see what difference that makes. There are 6 spinning drives and two SSD's I have taken individual reading from my LED screen and the LCD screen, surprisingly there isn't enough difference to get excited about buying a second LED screen to save electric. My i7 Mac mini died on me and my i5 is damaged, I damaged the logic board, I pulled the CD SATA socket off the motherboard. It may still work but I can't summon the enthusiasm to re-assemble it to find out. In fact I can't even remember why I was taking it to bits... I am wondering about getting an Intel iMac just for internet use and turning the MacPro off except when I am processing images. For now I am just evaluating my usage but the computer seems to be the villain. In very rough terms it's using about £200 worth of electric year, which seems a bit excessive. My house is fully fitted with LED room lamps and I cook and heat with gas, rarely have the TV on. I have a G5 iMac but it's no good for the internet because it isn't HTML5 savvy I think. It's stuck in the pre intel era. Main advantage is it will run OS9 software via Rosetta. I have a couple of applications which I still use and work perfectly well on the G5. Slight issue with communicating with the other computer but screen shots work OK. |
|||||||||
jk
|
IPad is your friend. Instant on/off. Almost no electricity use! You knew that anyway. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Robert wrote:It wouldn't run the installer for the first beta update to Mojave from High Sierra. Update: Have d/l latest full Mojave installer 5/9/18 it offers to install then when I start the installation, refuses, stating my graphics card had to be 'Metal' compatible. My current Graphics Card is: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285, 1024 MB I am considering the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970, 4096 MB I checked about the 970 GTX card and it seem NVIDIA are sketchy on Metal support. I don't quite understand 'Metal' It seems to be like 'CUDA' but different, I need/want 'Open GL' for Lightroom, which I think the 970 GTX should bring me but I can't understand if it will also make my MacPro 5.1 'Metal' compatible... |
|||||||||
jk
|
You mght find this useful. https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/production-expert-1/2018/6/12/how-do-you-find-mojave-compatible-graphics-cards-for-cheese-grater-apple-mac-pro-51-computers On macOS, Metal supports Intel HD and Iris Graphics from the HD 4000 series or newer, AMD GCN-based GPUs, and Nvidia Kepler-based GPUs or newer. AMD Radeon HD 7000, HD 8000, 200, 300, 400 and 500 series Nvidia - Most GeForce 600 series, most GeForce 700 series, and some GeForce 800M series |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Thanks JK, that link is extremely useful, explained fully and clearly. Pity about the 'Cheese Grater' reference, never heard that before. I had searched and come up with similar info but it was piecemeal from different sources and confusing, to me at least. It seems my mates NVIDIA 970 GTX may not be the route to Mojave, or GPU processing. |
|||||||||
amazing50
|
It runs on Windows 7 if the CPU has 64 bit capability. |
|||||||||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |