Category: Software


Audio O.T.: From Vinyl to Virtual—Part II

(Part I is here)

In Praise of Adobe Audition

By Ctein

As we resume...

I had digitized all 500 licorice pizzas and saved the resulting WAV files to duplicate external hard drives. Unfortunately, because of hardware/software glitches and ticks and pops in the records, I really had to listen to every transcription all the way through to make sure it was okay before I got rid of the record.

I like listening to music when I'm pixel-pushing on the computer. It turned out, pleasant surprise, that I still like 98% of what I bought decades ago. Newer tastes have expanded my musical enjoyment, but they haven't evicted the old ones. And, of course, much of the music had pleasant memory associations. Listening to 300+ hours of records took time, but it wasn't onerous.

What was onerous was doing the audio cleanup. Most of the albums were in pretty good shape, with only a handful of transients. When I would hear a tick or pop, I'd switch from Photoshop to Audacity, zoom in on the defective waveform and use the fabulous Repair tool to make it go away. Those little interruptions added about a third to the actual listening time; not a big deal.

Sadly, many albums had a lot more than a handful of problems. By way of example, here's an especially bad track (note: the wav files are about 60 MB each). Some were just inherently noisy, some had acquired too many scratches over the years. Whatever the reason, when there are dozens or hundreds of audio defects to repair, it becomes unreasonably time-consuming. Also not something I can do as a background task; the interruptions to work come too fast and furiously.

Consequently, after over two years I still had almost half the files to clean up and they were worse than what I'd completed. I was feeling frustrated. All the cheap/bundled-in click and pop filters I tried worked like they were running a lawnmower over the waveforms, chopping off peaks. They don't actually remove the noise they find, and at sensitivity settings high enough to be useful, they do major damage to the sound quality. They suck.

I found software packages out there that serious audio folks considered pretty good at this task. Problem: They all cost money, some into four figures. Most didn't have trial versions, being aimed at professionals who already knew what they needed. Then I discovered Adobe Audition 3 as a field-trial beta download for the Mac. I could try it for free. It rocked.

Now it's out as Audition 5.5. Fabulous. Although it's $350 it would've been worth every penny to me to get it the moment I embarked on this project. You can check it out for yourself for free for 30 days with a fully-functional trial download.

Audition is a full-blown audio production tool. You can use it to record, mix, edit, and master multitrack recordings (it can record from my Inspire 1394 with no hassles). I'm using a miniscule fraction of its capability.

Blog198figure1

This illustration shows my master panel. Top left is a listing of open files. Audition will let you queue up operations on different files and then run them as processor cores become available. Audition is multicore savvy and very fast. On my quad-core iMac, it can perform operations on three files simultaneously and process albums almost as fast as I can queue up tasks—typically it's one or two minutes to run an operation like click removal or noise reduction on an album.

At the bottom right are the history states. Like Photoshop, you can undo or revert to any previous state. There's primitive scripting abilities (maybe it has sophisticated ones I haven't found yet); I can record a series of operations and save it as a "Favorite" that I can call up or apply to batch process a bunch of files.

The first thing I do on an audio file is run Automatic Click Remover (under Effects/Noise Reduction) twice (the ACR panel is open in the illustration above). Sometimes a second pass catches a few transients the first pass didn't. I've made this double-pass a Favorite of mine so it doesn't take any more effort on my part; in fact it's easier, because it's now at a higher menu level. You can save custom control settings as a preset, but the default settings work just fine for me. Almost every tick and pop is eliminated and I can hear absolutely no difference in the quality of the resulting audio, even with electronic music and percussion that has sharp transients of its own. I ran ACR twice on my sample track, and the result is here. No, it's not perfect, but the original was pretty hopeless.

The last thing I do is reduce the background noise—any residual hum from the ground loops (almost none), turntable rumble, vinyl noise—with "Noise Reduction (process)." I use a customized frequency weighting (see below) that hits the lows more than the highs, as that's where most of my noise is. I capture a noise print for each album (occasionally, each side) by selecting a small portion of the recording at the beginning of the file or between tracks.

Blog198figure2

I usually run noise reduction twice at low strength; the very helpful folks in the Adobe Forums suggested I would get better results if I shaved off the noise in a couple of passes rather than trying to hit it all at once. You can hear what that does to my sample track by downloading it. The cleanest albums only required a single pass; a few exceptionally noisy ones required three, with new noise prints between each pass.

The best thing about this tool is the preview. Hitting the play button in the lower left of the panel starts running the filter on my audio without actually processing the file. I can move the time cursor all over the place to sample different parts of the album and make sure I like the effect. Super-cool is the "Output Noise Only" checkbox, that plays only what's being filtered out, so I can hear what I'm shaving off of the real music. That almost never proved to be a problem, often it was truly inaudible. Usually it was only at the low frequencies, in other words a slight deemphasis of the bass, easily corrected with equalization.

The peaking VU meters at the bottom let me see how much noise is still making it through. Without putting any real effort into fine-tuning, I could routinely get the mean noise level down between –55dB and –60 without any audible change to the music and sometimes into the mid-60s. The results of this two-stage process sound so much better than anything that ever came off of my turntable "naturally" that it amazes me.

Audition includes special functions for eliminating 60 cycle hum and its harmonics and for eliminating hiss. Neither of these were problems with my vinyl, but I expect that hiss removal will prove mighty useful when I get to the tape cassettes.

Average time I spend per album in Audition is under 10 minutes. I'm reprocessing all the files I did manually before I got Audition, and I'll be done by the time this column appears.

I've found one minor bug so far: the first time I call up my custom noise reduction preset, the graph shows a clearly-wrong frequency weighting curve. If I go back to the default preset and then pull up my custom preset a second time it loads fine.

Peculiarly, Audition can read flac files but it can't write them. I use Audition to process my digitized vinyl and save it as wav; then I open that up in Audacity and play it to check the quality and catch any glitches that may remain. The majority of Audition-cleaned files play straight through with no artifacts that need my attention. From there I save it as a flac file.

All things considered, though, I am so happy I discovered Audition.

Now there are my 100 cassette tapes, for which Audition will be a godsend. As for my 750–1000 hours of VHS tapes? Done last year. That's a subject for some future column.

Ctein

Ctein's next column(s) will begin a series called "Introduction to Digital Printing." The schedule has been mixed up because of Yr. Hmbl. Editor's recent vacation, but starting two days from now Ctein's column will re-alight on its regular Wednesday perch.

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2011 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Photography at Lynda.com

My friend Steve Rosenblum, who wrote the review of Peter Turnley's Paris workshop the other day, introduced me to Lynda.com about three years ago (...I think. Maybe four). I've subscribed ever since, and have used it intermittently, mainly for coming up to speed on specific aspects of specific software programs (most recently, spreadsheets—ugh!), but also to combat the murky, mucky feeling I occasionally get that I just don't know quite enough about a piece of software I'm using.

Personally, I have a peculiar and annoying affliction where computers are concerned: procedures I don't use regularly tend to wend their way out of my head somehow. You know those people who only have to learn something on a computer once, and then they've got it forever? I'm the opposite. I'll master something completely, and a year later I've forgotten it all and I'm back to the proverbial Square One. So I use Lynda.com for routine reviews, too.

For those of you (few, I would guess) who don't know Lynda.com already, it's the oldest, biggest, and probably best online software training site. Subscribers have access to thousands of hours of video tutorials segmented into easily identifiable smaller snips.

So let's say you already know Lightroom 2 but have just gotten Lightroom 3, and you want to know how to export to Flickr. So you'd skip "Lightroom 3 Essential Training" and go to "Lightroom 3 New Features." There's you'll find an Introduction, nine sections, and a Conclusion—with 53 subsections in all. You'd go to section 3, "Exporting from the Library," and find the subsection "Setting Up Flickr Publishing Services." A 3-minutes, 47-second video later, and you know what you need to know, having gotten it in a more easily ingestible format than scrounging for the book or wading through online help.

Photography, specifically
Lynda.com sports a pretty generous photography section. Mainly, it's organized around software, as you might expect. But it's also got some basics sections, a few tutorials from people such as the legendary glamour photographer Douglas Kirkland, and one-offs like a lecture by Rick Smolan (who did all those 24/7 books, among other projects) or 36 minutes on how to do group shots.

I can't begin to vouch for all the photography content: it's probably the part of the site I use the least. (I'm normally off banging my head against software puzzles in less familiar arenas.)

However (and here we get, finally and at long last, to the purpose for this post) there's now a new section called "Foundations of Photography: Black and White" with tutor/presenter/lecturer Ben Long that weighs in at just over three hours total.

Every digital B&W recommendation I've ever made has been controversial, so I assume all possible recommendations will be...including this one. Tutorials by their very nature are too advanced for some students, too basic for others, and hit only the occasional Goldilocks just right. But I'm looking forward to poking around in the 39 subsections of the B&W tutorial to test how my always-aging knowledge matches up to the current wisdom according to Lynda.com.

Mike

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2011 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Featured Comment by John King: "I've looked at some free preview tutorials at Lynda.com and they are very good. The ongoing subscription model doesn't work for me though. I prefer to pay once and access the material when I want a refresher or quick reference. Just like my library of books. George Jardine's video tutorials are my favorites and he does an excellent job of explaining digital B&W in his Adobe Camera Raw series. It is very high quality instruction with a pay once, access forever model. George was a Lightroom specialist at Adobe for many years, so it's hard to imagine anyone more qualified on this subject."

Featured Comment by MM: "Ah, Lynda, the untold secret of many a graphics professional!

"It's been my observation that—assuming a personal teacher or tutor isn't available—some people learn technical matters best from books and others learn best from videos. Neither way is better or worse, but I would guess that most people gravitate one way or the other.

"A few years ago, after counting up the number of weighty 'Learn Photoshop' and 'Learn Illustrator' and 'Learn Dreamweaver' books on my shelf, all of which remained largely untouched, I realized that I was never going to learn software from studying books (for what it's worth, I do love books and have a large non-technical library).

"So I subscribed to lynda.com. Since then I've never let my subscription lapse, because as a working professional in graphics fields, $300 a year for unlimited training and review, 24 hours a day, anywhere in the world, is relatively small potatoes. Obviously the equation is different for hobbyists who aren't planning to make a living with their software knowledge, but in one month with Lynda ($25) they can still, for example, learn Photoshop inside and out.

"True story: My nephew recently graduated from an Ivy League college (4 years = a fifth of a million dollars). Another relative asked me what to get the kid for graduation since the grad wants to work in visual/creative fields and jobs are very hard to come by. I replied that a year's subscription to lynda.com will do far more to help him reach his employment goals than anything he learned in his four years of college. Yes, I know, one should never equate a liberal-arts education with vocational training, but the financial comparison is pretty interesting."

Featured Comment by Stephen Best: "I watched 'Foundations of Photography: Black and White' in its entirety and, though I didn't learn much and had a few points to quibble with, I found it an excellent introduction to not just B&W production, but the language (less so meaning) of photography itself. Ben Long is an engaging presenter and the strength of this talk is its completeness, showing him out shooting and trying to make something of the results. I would think many here could do worse than spending the money and watching this and a few other talks to make their $25 worthwhile. Certainly it will give pause to some here hanging out for monochrome sensors."

Using Dropbox To Manage Projects With Big Files

Recently I was involved in a video production for the DIY Lighting Kits that demanded synchronization between a large number of participants. Well, that is usually the case right, you have the photographer (or more than one), the editor, a retoucher sometimes, a sound man,  and a client. It can get even more complex if you have even more stakeholders to the project. how do you sync them all? In this post, I want to share my personal experience with Dropbox a semi-free file synchronization solution. (Here is my personal subscription link, if you sign up through this, both you and I get some extra space)

Before diving into the technical solution a few words about projects. The ability of ad-hock teams to organize like this to meet a project creative goals and deadlines is truly amazing. Only a few years back it was not really possible to work with a scattered team like this unless you were working for a big organization with a pricey network and expensive servers. For me this means freedom. Freedom to hire better craftsmen regardless of their physical location. Freedom to interact faster and on a deeper level with fellow photographers, and freedom to put my efforts into my core business rather than deal with bureaucracy and technicalities.

read more

Adobe Lightroom 3

In case you're one of those who want Lightroom and don't have it yet, Amazon's Gold Box deal of the Day today (May 30th) [link removed—deal is over now —MJ, May 31] is Adobe Lightroom 3 (for Windows Vista / 7 / XP or Mac OS X) for only $119. That's almost as cheap as Photoshop Elements. If you need it but have been waiting for the right deal, now would appear to be the time.

And if you're looking for a very good way to spend the money you save, Michael Tapes has an excellent downloadable tutorial video called "Raw Without FUD" ("FUD" is "fear, uncertainty, and doubt") that also serves as a tutorial for Lightroom. It's not specific to Lightroom 3, but the approach is holistic and still relevant.

I don't think it's widely enough known that "RAW Without FUD" will help you with Lightroom too. And of course as we know from Ctein's column this past week, there's no virtue in cleaving to the JPEG your camera gives you—everyone should learn RAW, even those who elect not to use it.

Mike

FD (full disclosure) Dept.: Michael T. is an advertiser here. But I wouldn't recommend his video just because of that. He has a nice knack for explaining software, IMHO.

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2011 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Some Updates on My Photoshop CS5 Mac Problems

By Ctein

PS A few months back I wrote "Photoshop CS5: A Simple Desultory Philippic." Since then I've made some small progress at wrestling some of the alligators back into the swamp.

On the plug-in front, Topaz and Akvis have released sharpening and noise-reduction plug-ins that run under 64-bit Photoshop. I don't know how they compare to the ones I've been using with Photoshop CS4, but I intend to find out over the next several weeks. I'm keeping my fingers crossed; these folks write some interesting software, not your run-of-the-mill stuff.

I still have lots of work-critical plug-ins that are never likely to be updated or replaced, so I've figured out a workaround. It's got its problems, definitely far from ideal, but it gets me there well enough.

When I hit the point in working with a photograph in 64-bit Photoshop CS5 where I want to apply some plug-in that doesn't run there, I launch my copy of Photoshop CS4. In CS5 I select-all and copy the layer that I want to run the plug-in on. If it's a plug-in that I want to be running on a layer-modified photograph, I use the magic keystroke combination command-option-shift-E to create a single layer that's a merged version of the layers in my file and copy that.

I create a new, empty file in CS4 and paste the copied layer from CS5 into it. Then I run my plug-in on the copy. Select all, copy the modified layer, switch back to CS5 and paste it into a new layer in my original file.

Advantages? I don't have to shut down CS5 or lose my history states or workflow. It's a nondestructive edit, so I can take it or leave it or modify it further as need be, but I'm not making any irrevocable changes.

Disadvantages? Well, obviously, it's a bit slower and less convenient than just being able to apply the plug-ins directly from within CS5. You also need to have enough RAM in your system to happily support two copies of Photoshop running. This trick barely works at all on my 6 GB MacBook Pro, but it's fine on my 12 GB iMac.

Files get even bulkier, as you add new layers for each plug-in that you run. Which further increases the memory footprint.

The biggest problem I've run into is that it appears that CS4 is not entirely happy sharing memory space with CS5, even though there's an ample amount of RAM in my iMac to be supporting both. I discovered that I can make CS4 crash quite reliably if I try to run more than one plug-in (or one plug-in more than once) on a large image file. I'm not sure what the critical file size is; I routinely work on files between 30 and 100 megapixels in 16-bit color. Everything is fine the first time I run a plug-in on the copied-over layer. But, if I decide I don't like the results and undo them and then apply that plug-in again, or if I try to apply a second plug-in as a follow-up, Photoshop CS4 folds up its tent.

So, this is a trick that works exactly once. If I need to make more than one change under CS4, I need to save the first-plug-in-modified file, shut down CS4, relaunch it, and reopen that file. Then I can apply a second plug-in, or re-apply the first plug-in.

It's a kludge. No doubt about it. But it works. Well, it works better than sticking with CS4 or foregoing all my CS4 plug-ins to be able to work under CS5.

Still not jumping for joy, but I'm dealin'.

Ctein

Ctein's regular weekly column appears on TOP on Wednesdays.

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2011 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Deal o’ the Day

Adobepspe9

Amazon's Gold Box Deal of the Day today is Adobe Photoshop and Premiere Elements 9 for what looks like a $99 sale price (down from $124.25) plus an additional $30 off via mail-in rebate. I'm not entirely clear about the final price (maybe you can figure it out) but I think that's it.

I try to pass along these daily sales when they're pertinent to photography.

Mike

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2011 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Adobe Lightroom $100 Off

B&H Photo is offering $100 off Adobe Lightroom 3 when purchased with any one of dozens of cameras and lenses. (Click on the "Buy Together & Save" tab at the bottom of any entry.)

Mike

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2011 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Lightroom Coolness

Since we've kinda raked Adobe over the coals the last few days, it seems like equal time might be indicated for one of the coolest features in Lightroom 3. Back when we shot our food and drove to town in buckboards, this would have served for science fiction. I'm just sayin'.

Mike

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by using our links to B&H Photo and Amazon! Many thanks.

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2010 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Photoshop CS5: A Simple Desultory Philippic

By Ctein

I need to vent. Indulge me.

Photoshop CS5 for Mac is the worst case of half-baked software development that I have seen in a long time. Honestly, I can only assume its release was driven by marketing rather than engineers and architects. Much as I was looking forward to it, I wish they'd held back another year and done the job right.

Lloyd Chambers has written at great length, eloquently and accurately, on the myriad shortcomings of CS5; I refer you to his website. This is as good a place to start as any, but it's worth perusing the most recent six months of his blog entries for the assortment of important and informative articles he has written on the mess that Adobe has handed us.

Allow me to touch on the highlights that particularly vex me. First, almost everything that was outdated, wrong, or broken in CS4 is still in the same state in CS5. Saving multi-layer PSD files is horribly, painfully slow. For some reason it got a lot worse between CS3 and CS4, and it's stayed lousy. The many filters and other components that didn't work on 16-bit files in CS4 still don't work. Photoshop remains a mish-mash of 8-bit and 16-bit functions (by comparison, the efficient and affordable Picture Windows has been fully 16-bit since, well, forever.)

Photomerge still occasionally gets panoramic images assembled wrong, which means the user interface plug-in (PhotomergeUI) is a necessity for me. It was downgraded to an optional plug-in in CS4; now it doesn't work at all in 64-bit CS5. In fact, an appallingly large fraction of my third-party plug-ins will not run in 64-bit Photoshop, including the three I use on probably 80% of the photographs I work with.

It has been half a year since the release of CS5. I don't know what kind of coordination Adobe does with the third-party developers. I don't know why they didn't write a "compatibility box" within 64-bit Photoshop to allow use of the existing plug-ins, including the myriad important legacy ones that experienced printers use that are no longer under development and so will never be upgraded to 64-bit. Difficult? Yes. I sincerely doubt it was impossible.

Adobe didn't just drop the ball; they tripped over it and then kicked it into the sewer.

Is there a workaround? Sort of. Launch CS5 in 32-bit mode and you'll be able to use PhotomergeUI and all your other critical 32-bit plug-ins. Doing so, you lose a huge chunk of performance, almost a factor of two on computation-limited tasks. Worse, it doesn't let you access the large memory space that becomes available once the 32-bit barrier is broken. Worst, it won't even access memory as well as CS3 and CS4 did; CS5 (32) is back to being limited to 2 GB of RAM.

Blog162figure1Where have all the filters gone? Long time passing...On the left is the filter menu from Photoshop CS4 and CS5 run in 32-bit mode. Launch CS5 in 64-bit mode (middle shot) and a whole mess of your third-party filters will be gone. Open up a 16-bit file (right) and even more filters are gone; Adobe still hasn't completed recoding them from their 8-bit form. It's been, what, three generations now?

Blog162figure2
Where has all the memory gone? Long time ago...Photoshop CS3 and CS4 could directly access 3GB of RAM and make effective use of RAM above that. CS5 in 32-bit mode returns to the primitive memory model of yore.

Remarkably, 32-bit CS5 performs just about as well as CS4; apparently Adobe tightened up a lot of the code. But it's still running probably two thirds as fast as it would if it could indirectly access higher RAM like CS3/4. Even on my MacBook Pro, with its meager 6 GB of RAM, there's a serious performance hit running in CS5's 32-bit mode. On my 12 GB iMac the difference is huge; the "diglloydMedium" benchmark runs 3–4 times more slowly in CS5's 32-bit mode than 64-bit mode.

And meanwhile, my workflow is totally screwed up. At the moment, I'm mostly avoiding using CS5 while I figure this out; that's how many problems it's creating for me.

Okay, done venting. I admit that part of this is the disappointment of a kid who was promised a pony for Christmas and there's only a bicycle under the tree. Once I become adjusted to the situation, I'll may decide it's a really nice bicycle and have some very good things to say about it in future columns. But, right now, not so happy.

Ctein

Ctein's regular weekly column appears on TOP on Thursday mornings.

Send this post to a friend

Please help support TOP by using our links to B&H Photo and Amazon! Many thanks.

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2010 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Featured Comment by ILTim: "I'm a tool engineer working in high-end 3D CAD programs all day, and this feels a bit similar. Our cad programs range from $7,000 to $30,000 per user, plus a few grand a year in maintenance fees. Some of these vendors are focused only on marketable improvements that the sales team can use, neglecting bugs and poorly performing features that the professionals use day in and day out. It gets old being a user of a system like that, and after migrating to a new system due to a change in employers, I'd never take another job that required me to go back to that old cad system. The one I'm on now innovates regularly, but maintains incredible legacy support for deprecated features and does a truly admirable job with bug fixes. As I advance in my career, these experiences are going to drive the purchasing decisions of my employers, and the company that chased sales via added fluff will never get a dime. Never mind the bashing I give them to colleagues.

"Adobe is not creating Photoshop CS software to sell, they are creating productive, satisfied, and enthusiastic customers by providing them with tools, who in turn create a vibrant marketplace for Adobe. They can ride the brand name for a while, but ultimately by not serving the customers they will find themselves on a crash course.

"I've considered CS for years, but its been too darned expensive. Additionally, there is a lot I don't need there, and I've gotten the impression of stagnation. Then to top it off, the upgrade fees are not trivial.

"I've recently traded in PS Elements for GIMP, Picasa, and other free tools. I'm going to try hard to make them work because the developers are showing more promise than Adobe. Then, of course, there is that whole bloatware issue, the DLM (download manager), the trojan toolbars that come with acrobat reader and flash...I'm very unsatisfied with Adobe lately."

Photoshop Performance: The Saga Continues

By Ctein

I've written previously (see "Speeding up Photoshop with an External Drive" and "Maximum Photoshop Performance") about configuring software and hardware to get the most out of Photoshop. Well, my long-awaited copy of Photoshop CS5 for the Mac arrived just a few weeks back. And, by happy coincidence, I had a new external hard drive to test out as a scratch drive with it: the NewerTech Guardian MAXimus mini from Other World Computing, purveyors of many fine things Macintosh.

Blog161figure1

The MAXimus in all its diminutive glory. Looks bigger in the photos
than in real life, really.

Blog161figure2

Several things made this drive interesting. It's small—very small—about 5 x 3.5 x 2 inches and 1.5 pounds. It is truly a portable drive that can be powered by the FireWire port on your computer (it does come with an AC adapter, in case your machine doesn't have a FW port). It's got eSATA, a must for maximum performance—the FireWire cable can be plugged in to power the unit at the same time you're using the eSATA interface for data transfer.

Oh yeah, it's a RAID; this model, which runs $250, has two 500GB 7200 RPM drives. The MAXimus comes configured as RAID-1 (mirrored), if what you're after is secure storage, but it can be set up as RAID-0 (striped) to provide a full terabyte of really fast portable storage. Of course, that's the route I took. I paired it with the OWC Slim ExpressCard to eSATA Adapter, which lives permanently in my MacBook Pro. At $30, I just had to buy one, and it's a pretty slick performer. The eSATA-to-ExpressCard interface slows things down a bit so one realizes only about half the usual eSATA bandwidth, but it's a heck of a lot better than FireWire 800. Sure wish my iMac had eSATA or an ExpressCard slot. When trying the MAXimus on my iMac, I had to talk to it  via FW800—more on that later.

Blog161figure3
The OWC Slim ExpressCard to eSATA adapter I use every day.

To get an idea of how well this drive performed, I used Lloyd Chambers' DiskTester program. I have found it to be a reliable indicator of real world performance with both SATA and FW connections (USB has issues that result in a poor match between DiskTester's results and normal use—do not use a USB connection for a scratch drive, ever!). I also ran Lloyd's "diglloydMedium," "diglloydHuge," and "Speed1" benchmarks on Photoshop CS4, CS5 (64 bit) and CS5 (32 bit).

The MAXimus drive tested out as faster than any other external drive I've run off my MacBook Pro. Over the entire disk, for all kinds of file sizes, I saw consistent write speeds of 110 MB/sec and read speeds of 120MB/sec. That's configured as RAID-0 and connected via eSATA, of course. When configured as RAID-1, performance dropped in half. Similarly, hooking the MAXimus up through FW800 cost half that peak performance. If you ain't got SATA, there won't be any performance gain configuring this as a RAID-0.

My normal scratch drive for Photoshop clocks in at around 80 MB/sec. Did the jump to 110–120 MB/sec really make a difference? Across the board, in all three flavors of Photoshop, I measured an average 15% drop in the benchmark run times. Assembling some very large panoramas, I saw similar performance gains.

Fifteen percent doesn't sound like a lot, until you realize that I'm talking about generating huge panoramic files that can take 5 to 15 minutes to build with Photomerge on my MacBook Pro with its "paltry" 6GB of RAM. So, this doesn't just save seconds, it saves minutes. 'Course, an SSD would run even faster, but they're still a tad spendy. Understatement. Though I'm told that is going to improve shortly (keeping fingers crossed).

What happened with my late 2009 quad-core 27" iMac? Well, as I said, there's no eSATA, so throughput's cut in half. OWC will retrofit 2010 27" iMacs with eSATA. I'm not sure why they don't offer that service for the late 2009 model. Be that as it may, MAXimus can't pump more than 67 (write)/83 (read) MB/sec through the iMac's FW800 port. Furthermore, the iMac's internal drive is surprisingly peppy, delivering over 100MB/sec on reads and writes.

No surprise, then, that using the iMac's drive for scratch won out. It delivered an average 25% better Photoshop performance than the FireWired MAXimus. That's just not the way to get the best from this little powerhouse.

A faster scratch drive always wins, no matter where it's situated or whether or not it's the system drive. And, if you've got eSATA, the MAXimus is as fast as you can get without breaking the bank.

Ctein
(Photos courtesy OWC)

Ctein's regular weekly column appears every Thursday morning on TOP.

Send this post to a friend

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2010 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Photography Blog | Copyright Photography-Blog.co.za